FromSubjectDate
wes@obie.UUCP (Barnacle Wes) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 16 Sep 88 04:58:16 GMT
wes@obie.UUCP (Barnacle Wes) Re: Fortran vs C for computations 16 Sep 88 05:06:34 GMT
eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya) Re: why column arrays in Fortran (was opinions on computer languages) 18 Sep 88 07:51:34 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) Re: i++, i+=1, i=i+1 18 Sep 88 08:45:38 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 18 Sep 88 22:55:31 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: i++, i+=1, i=i+1 18 Sep 88 23:07:58 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Exception handling (was Fortran vs 19 Sep 88 01:14:03 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: PL/I performance 19 Sep 88 01:16:25 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Fortran 8X 19 Sep 88 01:33:58 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: i++, i+=1, i=i+1 19 Sep 88 18:59:10 GMT
psmith@mozart.uucp (Presley Smith) FORTRAN 8x Status Update 19 Sep 88 22:26:48 GMT
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 20 Sep 88 05:18:56 GMT
link@stew.ssl.berkeley.edu (Richard Link) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 20 Sep 88 06:54:58 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 20 Sep 88 07:34:43 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: function side effects (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 20 Sep 88 07:17:42 GMT
stevek@squid.ucsb.edu (Steve Keifling) Fortran-77 for Suns 20 Sep 88 07:27:50 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Just the facts ma'am (Re: Link on _TRUTH_) 20 Sep 88 17:16:51 GMT
afd@mruxd.UUCP (A Dietz) Wanted: Fortran graphics library for pc 16 Sep 88 15:21:02 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) Re: function side effects (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 20 Sep 88 15:32:08 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 20 Sep 88 13:56:11 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 20 Sep 88 14:11:38 GMT
dorn@fabscal.UUCP (Alan Dorn Hetzel) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 19 Sep 88 15:12:43 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 21 Sep 88 01:57:17 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 02:05:17 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 03:50:54 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) *THE SPECIAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 21 Sep 88 05:22:57 GMT
lfm@fpssun.fps.com (Larry Meadows) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 19 Sep 88 19:39:47 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 21 Sep 88 08:36:45 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Fortran vs C for computations 21 Sep 88 09:04:42 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Fortran vs C for computations 21 Sep 88 09:10:54 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: Arrays and pointers 21 Sep 88 18:44:43 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 19:02:30 GMT
francis@proxftl.UUCP (Francis H. Yu) Re: C associativity rules 21 Sep 88 17:22:51 GMT
mike@arizona.edu (Mike Coffin) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 21 Sep 88 18:09:11 GMT
lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 19 Sep 88 18:59:50 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) function side effects (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 19 Sep 88 19:50:18 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 19 Sep 88 20:08:46 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 19 Sep 88 20:28:32 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) Re: function side effects (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 20 Sep 88 04:18:34 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: function side effects (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 20 Sep 88 18:22:37 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 20 Sep 88 18:30:29 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 20 Sep 88 19:06:26 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: Arrays and pointers 20 Sep 88 22:40:47 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: *THE SPECIAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 21 Sep 88 19:14:34 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 19:22:51 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran vs C for computations 21 Sep 88 19:46:54 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 21 Sep 88 20:03:52 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 20:22:41 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Arrays and pointers 21 Sep 88 20:40:42 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: operator syntax 20 Sep 88 16:12:56 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 20 Sep 88 14:18:31 GMT
ins_aejs@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Edward Sullivan) Re: Fortran vs C for computations 19 Sep 88 17:47:02 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 21 Sep 88 15:09:16 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 15:18:33 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: *THE GENERAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 21 Sep 88 23:23:39 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Function call optimisations (was Re: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 23:41:24 GMT
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) `intrinsic' functions in forthcoming C standard 22 Sep 88 01:42:50 GMT
davis@galaxy.ee.rochester.edu (Al Davis) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 22 Sep 88 01:43:49 GMT
d25001@mic.UUCP (Carrington Dixon) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 03:06:33 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: function side effects (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 08:10:01 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 08:14:48 GMT
thompson@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Steve Thompson) Re: i++, i+=1, i=i+1 21 Sep 88 15:13:52 GMT
lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) Re: Arrays and pointers 21 Sep 88 16:25:59 GMT
lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 21 Sep 88 16:06:07 GMT
davis@galaxy.ee.rochester.edu (Al Davis) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 21 Sep 88 01:25:37 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 22:33:15 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Side effects in functions - the special case 21 Sep 88 22:52:11 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 22 Sep 88 15:34:30 GMT
scf@statware.UUCP (Steve Fullerton) Re: function side effects (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 20 Sep 88 15:26:13 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) *THE GENERAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 21 Sep 88 21:49:04 GMT
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) Function call optimisations (was Re: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 21 Sep 88 18:43:04 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Data types _without_ pointers 22 Sep 88 18:10:07 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 22 Sep 88 18:22:45 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: `intrinsic' functions in forthcoming C standard 22 Sep 88 18:35:13 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 22 Sep 88 18:52:14 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 22 Sep 88 19:00:46 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Side effects in functions - the special case 22 Sep 88 19:05:41 GMT
E8D@PSUVM.BITNET Lahey F77L vers. 3.0 22 Sep 88 14:06:26 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: Data types _without_ pointers 22 Sep 88 23:44:32 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) Re: Side effects in functions - the special case 22 Sep 88 15:45:46 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) Re: *THE GENERAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 22 Sep 88 16:32:33 GMT
dodson@mozart.uucp (Dave Dodson) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 22 Sep 88 14:22:09 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: Arrays and pointers 21 Sep 88 23:17:54 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) My widget is more portable than yours (was Fortan versus C) 23 Sep 88 00:25:53 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Confused about optimizing 1-COS(X)*COS(X) 23 Sep 88 00:30:08 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Arrays and pointers 23 Sep 88 01:18:10 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 23 Sep 88 01:23:36 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Fortran vs C for computations 23 Sep 88 01:36:26 GMT
jones@ingr.UUCP (Mark Jones) Re: C associativity rules 22 Sep 88 14:45:52 GMT
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) fifo queue (was Data types _without_ pointers) 23 Sep 88 16:33:24 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: My widget is more portable than yours (was Fortan versus C) 23 Sep 88 20:25:12 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Confused about optimizing 1-COS(X)*COS(X) 23 Sep 88 20:33:21 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Arrays and pointers 23 Sep 88 20:54:41 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran vs C for computations 23 Sep 88 21:05:57 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: *THE GENERAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 22 Sep 88 19:17:49 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) Re: *THE GENERAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 23 Sep 88 15:56:04 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Arrays and pointers 23 Sep 88 18:51:03 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 23 Sep 88 21:23:05 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Data types _without_ pointers 23 Sep 88 21:41:06 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: *THE GENERAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 23 Sep 88 21:48:31 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 23 Sep 88 14:51:10 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: data types without pointers 24 Sep 88 00:37:25 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: My widget is more portable than yours (was Fortan versus C) 24 Sep 88 00:49:47 GMT
bga@raspail.UUCP (Bruce Albrecht) Re: Arrays and pointers 22 Sep 88 21:26:03 GMT
hjm@cernvax.UUCP (Hubert Matthews) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 23 Sep 88 13:29:58 GMT
warner@hydrovax.nmt.edu (M. Warner Losh) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 23 Sep 88 19:19:24 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: data types without pointers 24 Sep 88 15:45:53 GMT
lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) Re: Side Effects of FORTRAN Functions 24 Sep 88 17:55:23 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 24 Sep 88 20:11:20 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: My widget is more portable than yours (was Fortan versus C) 23 Sep 88 22:23:29 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Portability/Standard Conforming/Giles 23 Sep 88 22:52:50 GMT
fouts@lemming.nas.nasa.gov.nas.nasa.gov (Marty Fouts) Re: Confused about optimizing 1-COS(X)*COS(X) 23 Sep 88 22:55:27 GMT
hirchert@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu Side Effects of FORTRAN Functions 22 Sep 88 20:02:00 GMT
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) The spectre of aliasing 25 Sep 88 03:04:35 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: data types without pointers 24 Sep 88 21:32:06 GMT
jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Re: Side Effects of FORTRAN Functions 24 Sep 88 21:43:19 GMT
lagache@violet.berkeley.edu (Edouard Lagache) A Separate European FORTRAN standard? Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh! 25 Sep 88 18:01:45 GMT
ags@h.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman) Re: *THE GENERAL CASE* (was: function side effects) 26 Sep 88 03:29:09 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) 24 Sep 88 14:18:26 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: Data types _without_ pointers 24 Sep 88 14:44:21 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Fortran vs C for computations 25 Sep 88 07:29:44 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 25 Sep 88 07:46:13 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) pointers (was Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal) 25 Sep 88 08:01:45 GMT
cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) We need pointers 25 Sep 88 12:51:44 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: Data types _without_ pointers 23 Sep 88 02:44:30 GMT
seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan) Re: Data types _without_ pointers 26 Sep 88 00:27:40 GMT
cca@pur-phy (Charles C. Allen) Data types, pointers, etc. 27 Sep 88 01:24:20 GMT
cdb@hpclcdb.HP.COM (Carl Burch) ISO Fortran 8x Meeting (long) 27 Sep 88 00:55:22 GMT
ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Re: Data types, pointers, etc. 27 Sep 88 19:45:22 GMT
dietrich@cernvax.UUCP (Dietrich Wiegandt) Report on WG5 meeting in Paris 27 Sep 88 07:53:35 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: My widget is more portable than yours (was Fortan versus C) 26 Sep 88 13:21:25 GMT
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 26 Sep 88 13:33:53 GMT
ka@june.cs.washington.edu (Kenneth Almquist) Re: Data types _without_ pointers 28 Sep 88 19:34:34 GMT
ok@quintus Pointers in Fortran 28 Sep 88 06:48:02 GMT
hirchert@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu Re: Fortran versus C for numerical anal 28 Sep 88 14:41:00 GMT