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