WatFor77 -- Re: Command-line argument capture
in [Fortran]
|
Prev: compiler bug?
Next: Fortran sleep function ???
From: user1 on 16 Dec 2008 18:35 GaryScott wrote: > On Dec 16, 7:33 am, m...(a)skyway.usask.ca wrote: >> In a previous article, user1 <u...(a)example.net> wrote:>Kevin G. Rhoads wrote: >>>>> for use with WATFOR77. Since we are not in a position to test >>>>> the described implementation, >>>> A version of WATFOR77 for MS-DOS used to be available (I think it still is) >>>> for download. I think I got a copy by way of OpenWatcom, but it was a while >>>> back and I am not sure: >>> I couldn't find it at ftp.openwatcom.org >>> Skip Knoble has a link to WATFORF77 on his Fortran resources page. It is a >>> nicely done page, but it seems that the link has now become obsolete. >> Just download the Fortran - the version (DOS16,DOS32,WIN31, >> WIN32 .. even OS2 ) is asked for when you start a work project (in the IDE) >> (www.openwatcom.org) >> >> Chris > > Do we want to perpetuate the use of this obsolete dialect? What are > the plans to advance OW to F2k3? A good portion of this and other recent threads have dealt with how to do various things using MS Fortran v3.31, which is a truly obsolete product. It boggles my mind that anyone would still be using it. The OpenWatcom F77 compiler is vastly superior. (at least IMHO) Advancing OW towards F2k3 is entirely dependent on the labor of volunteers. It seems that most of the contributors to the project have more interest in C/C++ than Fortran.
From: e p chandler on 16 Dec 2008 19:38 On Dec 16, 6:35 pm, user1 <u...(a)example.net> wrote: > GaryScott wrote: > > On Dec 16, 7:33 am, m...(a)skyway.usask.ca wrote: > >> In a previous article, user1 <u...(a)example.net> wrote:>Kevin G. Rhoads wrote: > >>>>> for use with WATFOR77. Since we are not in a position to test > >>>>> the described implementation, > >>>> A version of WATFOR77 for MS-DOS used to be available (I think it still is) > >>>> for download. I think I got a copy by way of OpenWatcom, but it was a while > >>>> back and I am not sure: > >>> I couldn't find it at ftp.openwatcom.org > >>> Skip Knoble has a link to WATFORF77 on his Fortran resources page. It is a > >>> nicely done page, but it seems that the link has now become obsolete. > >> Just download the Fortran - the version (DOS16,DOS32,WIN31, > >> WIN32 .. even OS2 ) is asked for when you start a work project (in the IDE) > >> (www.openwatcom.org) > > >> Chris > > > Do we want to perpetuate the use of this obsolete dialect? What are > > the plans to advance OW to F2k3? > > A good portion of this and other recent threads have dealt with how to do > various things using MS Fortran v3.31, which is a truly obsolete product. It > boggles my mind that anyone would still be using it. 1. It's small, it's fast, it's not bloatware and it's not rife with bugs. 2. Old programs are FUN to play with. 3. Some people think in Fortran IV or Fortran-77. 4. Specialty applications like instrumentation have an amazingly long lifetime. Until last year I ran applications whose core was Win 3.1 to interface with and program equipment. Proprietary programs and hardware are slow to change. A serial interface box that runs at 19.2 for that application is $600! 20+ years ago, I read in instrument data from punched paper tape! AFAIK the equipment is still running. > The OpenWatcom F77 compiler is vastly superior. (at least IMHO) > > Advancing OW towards F2k3 is entirely dependent on the labor of volunteers. It > seems that most of the contributors to the project have more interest in C/C++ > than Fortran.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: Terence on 16 Dec 2008 20:04 > A good portion of this and other recent threads have dealt with how to do > various things using MS Fortran v3.31, which is a truly obsolete product. It > boggles my mind that anyone would still be using it. It works, it's very fast. Even I have no trouble with it. Just:- For1 progrm Pas2 link progrm ret (optional list file) ret ret additional dos libraries <ret> Then if I want to do Windows stuff I just use this tested code in DVF and recompile-link with a different additional (Win) library. It's PRODUCTIVE! And any "bug" suspect has been the programmer, not the compiler. "The little compiler that could, and does and does...." (I've tried a few others; I know which works for me.)
From: Gary Scott on 16 Dec 2008 20:40 e p chandler wrote: > On Dec 16, 6:35 pm, user1 <u...(a)example.net> wrote: > >>GaryScott wrote: >> >>>On Dec 16, 7:33 am, m...(a)skyway.usask.ca wrote: >>> >>>>In a previous article, user1 <u...(a)example.net> wrote:>Kevin G. Rhoads wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>for use with WATFOR77. Since we are not in a position to test >>>>>>>the described implementation, >>>>>> >>>>>>A version of WATFOR77 for MS-DOS used to be available (I think it still is) >>>>>>for download. I think I got a copy by way of OpenWatcom, but it was a while >>>>>>back and I am not sure: >>>>> >>>>>I couldn't find it at ftp.openwatcom.org >>>>>Skip Knoble has a link to WATFORF77 on his Fortran resources page. It is a >>>>>nicely done page, but it seems that the link has now become obsolete. >>>> >>>> Just download the Fortran - the version (DOS16,DOS32,WIN31, >>>>WIN32 .. even OS2 ) is asked for when you start a work project (in the IDE) >>>> (www.openwatcom.org) >> >>>>Chris >> >>>Do we want to perpetuate the use of this obsolete dialect? What are >>>the plans to advance OW to F2k3? >> >>A good portion of this and other recent threads have dealt with how to do >>various things using MS Fortran v3.31, which is a truly obsolete product. It >>boggles my mind that anyone would still be using it. > > > 1. It's small, it's fast, it's not bloatware and it's not rife with > bugs. > 2. Old programs are FUN to play with. > 3. Some people think in Fortran IV or Fortran-77. > 4. Specialty applications like instrumentation have an amazingly long > lifetime. Until last year I ran applications whose core was Win 3.1 to > interface with and program equipment. Proprietary programs and > hardware are slow to change. A serial interface box that runs at 19.2 > for that application is $600! > 20+ years ago, I read in instrument data from punched paper tape! > AFAIK the equipment is still running. Yeah, i work in aerospace. I'm well aware of old equipment that won't or can't be allowed to die (with 30-50 year lifespans). I can usually get funding for replacing truly necessary, obsolete equipment. It may take a year or three, but it can be done. > > > > > > > > >>The OpenWatcom F77 compiler is vastly superior. (at least IMHO) >> >>Advancing OW towards F2k3 is entirely dependent on the labor of volunteers. It >>seems that most of the contributors to the project have more interest in C/C++ >>than Fortran.- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > > -- Gary Scott mailto:garylscott(a)sbcglobal dot net Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org -OR- Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows it can't be done. -- Henry Ford
From: Gary Scott on 16 Dec 2008 20:41
Terence wrote: >>A good portion of this and other recent threads have dealt with how to do >>various things using MS Fortran v3.31, which is a truly obsolete product. It >>boggles my mind that anyone would still be using it. > > > It works, it's very fast. > Even I have no trouble with it. Just:- > > For1 progrm > Pas2 > link progrm > ret > (optional list file) ret > ret > additional dos libraries <ret> > > Then if I want to do Windows stuff I just use this tested code in DVF > and recompile-link with a different additional (Win) library. > It's PRODUCTIVE! > And any "bug" suspect has been the programmer, not the compiler. > > "The little compiler that could, and does and does...." > > (I've tried a few others; I know which works for me.) no modules i think it does have rexx with it though ?? that i like -- Gary Scott mailto:garylscott(a)sbcglobal dot net Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org -OR- Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows it can't be done. -- Henry Ford |