|Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOS or a email@example.com (Peter Dassow) (2010-12-26)|
|Re: Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOS firstname.lastname@example.org (Marco) (2010-12-27)|
|Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOS or a email@example.com (2010-12-30)|
|Re: Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOS firstname.lastname@example.org (steve) (2010-12-31)|
|Re: Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOS email@example.com (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2011-01-02)|
|Re: Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOS firstname.lastname@example.org (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2011-01-03)|
|Re: Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOS email@example.com (robin) (2011-01-13)|
|Date:||Fri, 31 Dec 2010 13:56:59 -0800 (PST)|
|Posted-Date:||01 Jan 2011 22:17:59 EST|
On Dec 30, 7:46 am, compil...@is-not-my.name wrote:
> From a little time searching the web I found a thread here:
> reading through it suggests a modern compliant compiler should compile
> compliant code from the old days. One of the great things about old
> languages, especially old languages IBM supported, is almost everything
> that used to work 50 years ago still does today.
This is almost true. Fortran 95 has short list of deleted features
(e.g., REAL do-loop index). Most (all?) modern compilers still
implement the deleted feature. More importantly there are two
F66 features that most (all?) modern compilers do not implement.
I cannot remember one and would need to pull out my copy
of F66 to find it. The other feature is the extended do loop.
22.214.171.124.2 A DO is said to have an EXTENDED RANGE if both
of the following conditions apply:
(1) There exists a GO TO statement or arithmetic IF
statement within the range of the innermost DO of a
completely nested nest that can cause control to pass
out that nest.
(2) There exists a GO TO statement of arithmetic IF
statement not within the nest that, in the collection
of all possible sequences of execution in the particular
program unit, could be executed after a statement of the
type described in (1), and the execution of which could
cause control to return into the range of the innermost
DO of the completely nested nest.
This looks like an early attempt at exception handling.
> Therefore,http://www.gfortran.org/might be a good first stop. I don't
> know if they have a Windows version but they (gcc) usually do have
> somebody building Windows installers.
Yes, there are windows builds. Go to the gfortran wiki.
If OP doesn't want to bother with installing gfortran, I'm more
than willing to throw his code at gfortran. Feel free to contact
me off list.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.