[Info-vax] Text processing examples with Fortran requested

[glen herrmannsfeldt]

Ken Fairfield <ken.fairfield at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 5:12?am, koeh... at eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob
> Koehler) wrote:
(snip)

>> ? ?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.

I thought Fortran 2008 was out.  If not, it is in the very late
final draft stage.  The fact that there are no completely
compliant 2003 compilers doesn't seem to be slowing them down much.
 
> 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.

(snip)

-- glen