[Info-vax] Text processing examples with Fortran requested

[Ken Fairfield]

On Nov 17, 5:12 am, koeh... at eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob
Koehler) wrote:
> In article <7mdbovF3h08h... at mid.individual.net>, billg... at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>
> > As for the standards beyond Fyortran-77, did nayone ever make
> > use of them or the new features they brought to the table?  I
> > have seen recent job postings for Fortran positions and they
> > all specified Fotran-IV or Fortran-77.
>
>    The code was probable written in -IV or -77.  The only compilers I've
>    seen since -77 was DEC's -95 which eventually had part of -99.
>
>    I'm sure other vendors make at least -95, but I'm not sure gnu ever
>    went past -77.  I understand no one has written a compiler for
>    standard(s) after -99.

Apparently my posts aren't getting out to the news group...or
perhaps people are choosing to ignore them...  Whatever.

There was never a Fortran "99".  The standard after Fortran 95
*is* Fortran 2003, and *is* the current international standard.

Besides commercial compilers from IBM, Cray and Intel,
gnu's gfortran is rapidly implementing the new features of
F2003.  IBM claims full compliance.  I believe Cray is nearly
there.  There are some, perhaps esoteric, new features in
F2003 that are difficult to implement and, according to the
vendors, for which they have seen small demand from their
customers compared to other features, so  they've been late
to be implemented.

See:

   http://www.polyhedron.com/compare0html

for a comparison of language compliance between available
compilers.  The site also has performance, etc.,
comparisons.

Finally, F2008 is the draft standard, which fixes up
some omissions in F2003 (allocatable scalars, e.g.)
and adds some features (co-arrays).

    -Ken