[Info-vax] [OT] Current students apparently can't read Fortran code...

[Don Baccus]

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 5:26:59 AM UTC-7, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <62596294$0$703$1472... at news.sunsite.dk>,
> Arne Vajhøj <ar... at vajhoej.dk> wrote: 
> >On 4/15/2022 8:04 AM, Dan Cross wrote: 
> >> In article <6258c4e1$0$693$1472... at news.sunsite.dk>, 
> >> Arne Vajhøj <ar... at vajhoej.dk> wrote: 
> >>> On 4/13/2022 10:02 PM, Don Baccus wrote: 
> >>>> [snip] 
> >>>> "While much of the subsequent reworking of the model has led to a 
> >>>> reduction in these historical influences, some parts of the model 
> >>>> still hark back to the days of punch cards, FORTRAN 66 and line 
> >>>> printer output. A charitable interpretation would be that while 
> >>>> embracing the new (FORTRAN 90/95, multi-processing, netcdf, etc.), we 
> >>>> endeavour to maintain some of the more harmless GISS traditions 
> >>>> (which some might call eccentricities) in a spirit of continuity with 
> >>>> those who have previously worked on the model. On the other hand, 
> >>>> some of those early decisions (for instance regarding diagnostics, or 
> >>>> conservation properties) turned out to be very far-sighted and are a 
> >>>> principle reason why the GISS series of models continue to play a 
> >>>> useful and important role in the world of GCM simulations." 
> >>> 
> >>> A quick look at a few randomly selected files from the 
> >>> code at https://simplex.giss.nasa.gov/snapshots/ 
> >>> did not show very old code - lots of 90 and some 
> >>> 77 upgraded to 90. 
> >> 
> >> Hmm, I'm not sure about that: 
> >> 
> >> : chandra; pwd 
> >> /Users/cross/Downloads/modelE2_dev/model 
> >> : chandra; cloc . 
> >> 613 text files. 
> >> 568 unique files. 
> >> 26 files ignored. 
> >> 
> >> github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.92 T=1.67 s (340.1 files/s, 279550.2 lines/s) 
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> >> Language files blank comment code 
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> >> Fortran 77 361 30746 86473 272461 
> >> Fortran 90 175 9720 14530 50033 
> >> C/C++ Header 11 264 0 1148 
> >> make 13 130 36 418 
> >> Korn Shell 1 31 35 128 
> >> m4 3 56 312 127 
> >> Pascal 2 1 0 120 
> >> C 2 33 27 78 
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> >> SUM: 568 40981 101413 324513 
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> >> : chandra; 
> >> 
> >> I took a peak at a few files; it seems pretty archaic to me. 
> > 
> >If you look at the .f files that are supposedly 77 then 
> >it really just are old fixed format - the code are full of 
> >90 features. 
> > 
> >Example advc1d.f - code starts in column 7, comments are 
> >a c in column 1 - but the code would not build with 77. 
> > 
> >Declarations like: 
> > 
> > integer, intent(IN) :: kk
> I think it's fair to say that there are some FORTRAN 90 features 
> thrown in, but I don't think it's fair to say that that makes it 
> FORTRAN 90 in anything other than a strictly technical sense. 
> 
> Idly, I wonder if this is what "modernized" COBOL code bases 
> look like?
> >Loops like: 
> > 
> > do k=1,kk 
> > ... 
> > end do
> My VAX FORTRAN manual from well before 1990 shows support for 
> that particular construct. :-) 
> 
> - Dan C.
"My VAX FORTRAN manual from well before 1990 shows support for
that particular construct. :-)"

Extensions are often adopted by a standard's committee from existing implementations ...