Re: FORTRAN vs. Fortran (was: November 5th is Clang-Day)

On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:21:19AM +0000, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> 	Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:08:18 +1100
> 	From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog_at_freebsd.org>
> 	To: Erich Dollansky <erichfreebsdlist_at_ovitrap.com>
> 	Subject: FORTRAN vs. Fortran (was: November 5th is Clang-Day)
> 
> 	On Friday,  2 November 2012 at 12:21:03 +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> 	> Hi,
> 	>
> 	> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 21:59:17 -0700
> 	> Steve Kargl <sgk_at_troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
> 	>>
> 	>> BTW, the name of the language is "Fortran".  It's been "Fortran"
> 	>> for the last 30-something years.
> 	>
> 	> I never realised the name change. It seems that I am not alone with
> 	> this.
> 
> 	Nor I.  Looking at the Wikipedia page, I discover that it had been
> 	spelt "Fortran" as early as 1956, and there's even a copy of the 1956
> 	Fortran manual online: http://www.fortran.com/FortranForTheIBM704.pdf
> 	Interesting reading.
> 
> come on guys, fortran is not case sensitive...
> 
> Anyway I guess it's good news that LLVM
> is being used also by Cray and Nvidia.
> It's a shame though that, with LLVM as the
> default compiler, further development of
> FreeBSD/ia64 and FreeBSD/sparc64
> will probably suffer and then stop altogether.

If you read either my annoucment or the diff closly you will note that
the default it only changing for x86 architectures.

-- Brooks