Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!hc!lanl!jlg From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal Message-ID: <3746@lanl.gov> Date: 19 Sep 88 20:08:46 GMT References: <1530@ficc.uu.net> Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory Lines: 23 From article <1530@ficc.uu.net>, by peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva): > char (*twodarray)[10]; > twodarray = malloc(10*sizeof(*twodarray)); > twodarray[9][5] = 'c'; > Satisfied? No, I still like the Fortran 8x stuff better: ALLOCATABLE, CHARACTER::TWODARRAY(:,:) ... ALLOCATE (TWODARRAY(10,10)) ... TWODARRAY(5,9) = 'c' You are a died-in-the-wool C type and I suppose I could never convince you that arrays and pointers are two separate and distinct concepts that should each be used only when appropriate. _Most_ uses of arrays (even dynamically allocated ones) don't need explicit user-visable pointers to function correctly. Your declaration syntax above still contains a lot of pointer related _junk_ that has nothing to do which what I want to declare. J. Giles Los Alamos