On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 01:46:10PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > >I'm saddened to see FORTRAN ripped out of the base system - and I'd > >personally do the import work if it weren't for the the extra > >dependencies GNU FORTRAN 9x requires. > > > >But 'ports/lang/gfortran' is an abomination. > > I don't know about that, but it's certainly a lot of bloat. > > This is why I alluded before to an f2c based replacement. > > The reasons against inclusion of GCC 4.1.1 Fortran involves changing (and > increased) library dependencies. An f2c based f77 replacement would > eliminate that problem while preserving functionality that has been part > of BSD for over two decades. Given the rate of change of f2c and it's > associated libraries (i.e. practically nil), the maintenance overhead > after the initial import to the base should be very small (even when the > underlying C compiler changes). The majority of the import work would be > writing a replacement f77 driver command. > See the history of Fortran in the base system. Please let f2c die. There have been substantial advances in the Fortran language over the past 3 decades. In fact, there has been 3 revision to the ISO Standard. People, who use Fortran, want speed (and correct answers), and f2c certainly isn't going to win any speed contest. PS: ports/lang/f77. -- SteveReceived on Tue May 30 2006 - 18:14:06 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:56 UTC