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

[Dan Cross]

In article <625966c6$0$700$14726298 at news.sunsite.dk>,
Arne Vajhøj  <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>On 4/15/2022 8:26 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
>>[snip]
>> 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.
>
>83.5
>
>:-)
>
>Point is that it is not 60's and 70's code using Fortran II, IV and 66.
>
>It is 90 and 77 with 90 features mixed in.
>
>The revision history at the bottom of advc1d.f are all from 2001-2006.

I think it's more likely you're seeing a single code base that's
been under more or less constant development for quite some
time, probably dating back to (at least...) the 1970s.  The idea
that someone would include a revision history might be a
relatively recent introduction: consider Unix, for example; if
one looks at, say, the illumos code base one sees copyright
notices going back to the 80s on code that is known to be much
older.

Looking at this, one sees a mixture of styles and features from
several different FORTRAN versions and variants.  And as has
been pointed out, this is just one GCM.

>>> Loops like:
>>>
>>>        do k=1,kk
>>>          ...
>>>        end do
>> 
>> My VAX FORTRAN manual from well before 1990 shows support for
>> that particular construct.  :-)
>
>That is how standards evolve.
>
>If an implementation has a nice extension it gets added.

Of course!  The point is that `END DO` does not imply FORTRAN 90
by itself.

	- Dan C.