Re: Ada vs Fortran for scientific applications
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
soc.culture.hawaii only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

soc.culture.hawaii Profile…
 Up
Re: Ada vs Fortran for scientific applications         


Author: adaworks
Date: Jul 11, 2006 10:43

"Tom Linden" kednos.com> wrote in message
news:op.tci6xqiizgicya@hyrrokkin...
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 08:02:47 -0700, sbcglobal.net> wrote:

My comments were not restricted to PL/I, but apply generally to
any compiler, and specifically Ada was intended. Since I had put
in the scaffolding for producing the info in cross reference listings
I also played with generating precisely the sort of warnings that you
refer to, but found it generated too much "clutter" of questionable
value. That was my view, FWIW
>
I think you are right about clutter in programs that contain a lot
of global variables. For example, in a COBOL program, where
the data is organized (pre-OOCOBOL) in a DATA DIVISION,
these kinds of warnings would be clutter.

In other languages with global variables the same would be true.
I recall early Ada programs where the designers would create

package COMMON is -- Fortran programmers
package DATA_DIVISION is -- COBOL Programmers
package COMPOOL is -- CMS-2 and Jovial programmers
Show full article (3.13Kb)
2 Comments
Re: using MISC (post 1987 Forth hardware) opcodes         


Author: George Hubert
Date: Jul 12, 2006 03:57

Marcel Hendrix wrote:
> Elizabeth D Rather forth.com> writes Re: using MISC (post 1987 Forth hardware) opcodes
> [..]
>> I concur with the general point that Forth stacks don't need to be big.
>> We've done a few studies on large applications, and the stacks rarely
>> get deeper than 4-5 items.
>
> Hm.
>
> I tried iForth, SwiftForth, gForth and VFX with the following words
> (all on Windows XP):
>
> : w1 S" HELLO" TYPE ; TEST w1
> : w2 123.123e-12 F. ; TEST w2
> ( w3 ) TEST WORDS
> ( w4 ) TEST CREATE aap
>
> Approximate number of return stack cells needed for ...
>
> word iForth SwiftForth gForth VFX ...
Show full article (1.54Kb)
no comments
Re: using MISC (post 1987 Forth hardware) opcodes         


Author: George Hubert
Date: Jul 12, 2006 03:57

Marcel Hendrix wrote:
> Elizabeth D Rather forth.com> writes Re: using MISC (post 1987 Forth hardware) opcodes
> [..]
>> I concur with the general point that Forth stacks don't need to be big.
>> We've done a few studies on large applications, and the stacks rarely
>> get deeper than 4-5 items.
>
> Hm.
>
> I tried iForth, SwiftForth, gForth and VFX with the following words
> (all on Windows XP):
>
> : w1 S" HELLO" TYPE ; TEST w1
> : w2 123.123e-12 F. ; TEST w2
> ( w3 ) TEST WORDS
> ( w4 ) TEST CREATE aap
>
> Approximate number of return stack cells needed for ...
>
> word iForth SwiftForth gForth VFX ...
Show full article (1.54Kb)
no comments