• Re: history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn

    From John Levine@3:633/10 to All on Saturday, January 31, 2026 23:10:21
    According to Niocl s P˘l Caile n de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com>:
    I want to quote an old comp.compilers post by its moderator about how
    FORTRAN programmers are not bothered to consult the FORTRAN standard
    (circa FORTRAN-66) so they insist that they know FORTRAN when they do
    not, so a new FORTRAN standard (circa FORTRAN-77) made a >backwards-incompatible change to accept this wrong belief of what
    FORTRAN really is. Alas searching for it takes too long (the 3 search
    options offered by

    I'm pretty sure I didn't say that. Possibly someone else did but I don't recall that either. In fact F77 tried hard to stay compatible with F66 and
    the few incompatibilities were well documented and had good rationales.

    --
    Regards,
    John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
    Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From albert@3:633/10 to All on Sunday, February 01, 2026 22:11:29
    In article <10lm24t$iqv$1@gal.iecc.com>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote: >According to Niocl s P˘l Caile n de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com>:
    I want to quote an old comp.compilers post by its moderator about how >>FORTRAN programmers are not bothered to consult the FORTRAN standard
    (circa FORTRAN-66) so they insist that they know FORTRAN when they do
    not, so a new FORTRAN standard (circa FORTRAN-77) made a >>backwards-incompatible change to accept this wrong belief of what
    FORTRAN really is. Alas searching for it takes too long (the 3 search >>options offered by

    I'm pretty sure I didn't say that. Possibly someone else did but I don't >recall that either. In fact F77 tried hard to stay compatible with F66 and >the few incompatibilities were well documented and had good rationales.

    In 1990 I led a project with Shell. All calculations were still required to
    use FORTRAN IV. Because there was substantial graphics involved we got dispensation to use c on VMS. (Using transputers, also occam was allowed.) Compatibility was a priority.

    John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",

    Groetjes Albert
    --
    The Chinese government is satisfied with its military superiority over USA.
    The next 5 year plan has as primary goal to advance life expectancy
    over 80 years, like Western Europe.

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.10
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Don Y@3:633/10 to All on Sunday, February 01, 2026 14:42:51
    On 2/1/2026 2:11 PM, albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote:
    I'm pretty sure I didn't say that. Possibly someone else did but I don't
    recall that either. In fact F77 tried hard to stay compatible with F66 and >> the few incompatibilities were well documented and had good rationales.

    In 1990 I led a project with Shell. All calculations were still required to use FORTRAN IV. Because there was substantial graphics involved we got dispensation to use c on VMS. (Using transputers, also occam was allowed.) Compatibility was a priority.

    In software, compatibility is the bane of good design. Just because
    something made sense for a particular project, doesn't mean it
    makes sense for YOUR project.

    Or, if it is even "best practices" any longer.

    I chuckle when I think of how many devices using Linux kernels
    are carrying the cost of file system support when they likely
    never would have put "support for a filesystem" on their list
    of requirements.

    And, when the whole notion of a global namespace actually makes
    their design LESS secure/robust!

    (And ACLs? etc. Really?? All that extra, UNNEEDED code that
    just makes your product buggier and more bloated...)


    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.10
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)