From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Tue Mar 2 03:08:34 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www2.open-std.org Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id E19F1C3BA2F; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 03:08:34 +0100 (CET) X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org X-Greylist: delayed 487 seconds by postgrey-1.18 at www2.open-std.org; Tue, 02 Mar 2010 03:08:33 CET Received: from mail-vw0-f47.google.com (mail-vw0-f47.google.com [209.85.212.47]) by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC57C3BA2D for ; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 03:08:33 +0100 (CET) Received: by vws11 with SMTP id 11so389978vws.34 for ; Mon, 01 Mar 2010 18:08:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=YdF2FuGtO0lSAGXOXYVPdZEdGGHeveEhX+JPUZSusLE=; b=JHFM/Yq2B5HAs0iWf7aUyjrdJfxLXe+0khYjBBou/HvVyKZxG59HfjxKDiLPNOhw2R 4Tx9ECTQAVsOO+mT0LuFBZPGR2fn8QRR2kx9S+zt2QNhKflb+7aBO1Rw3ogs6zQhClQF ZUgc6IkAU5GufNbLtEw5hC3pE1ZU2QpACqqtI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=AVKvpT69WjmpSKLdjN61ZPaguNH6arS7Aff3XD5z8OpdHJscj+c1N7ivR+zAT+XVdY yRlr6vS6RuXXHN/wy848pL+d73qg0diqbumEYW6F32Kd8dBPOHNmkrPA+zICXdjfOyNE M6T6bXW7arzX5YjaeI6V4oCTDZRrYRTeRpEqk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.107.72 with SMTP id a8mr3733195vcp.92.1267495224675; Mon, 01 Mar 2010 18:00:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B8C5370.3080908@cray.com> References: <20100301174456.8A65CC178D9@www2.open-std.org> <20100301181556.45D4FC178D9@www2.open-std.org> <4B8C47B9.8030904@cray.com> <20100301233719.1DD7AC3BA1E@www2.open-std.org> <4B8C5370.3080908@cray.com> Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 19:00:24 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4204) RE: RE: 43 Fortran compilers From: Walt Brainerd To: longb@cray.com, fortran standards email list for J3 Cc: "sc22wg5@open-std.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09f8de4949f11770480c7ba32 Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk --00c09f8de4949f11770480c7ba32 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Just to add to the confusion: a) CDC has a Fortran compiler on the 1604 (Cray's first design, perhaps, and b) While a grad student at Purdue in the '60s, I used PUFFT, Purdue U. Fast Fortran Translator, a system much like Watfor, that processed a while bunch of student Fortran jobs as one batch. I remember going there and try a program consisting of END. It took something like 40 sec to process it as a regular IBM batch program. Hence PUFFT. On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Bill Long wrote: > I suspect the University of Waterloo compilers were Watfor and Watfiv. > These are what were used in by the programming classes I took as an > undergrad (1969-73) on an IBM 360/65. These "compilers" were really > interpreters that translated the code very quickly and produced detailed > error messages, including at runtime. The execution speed was poor. > However, for a bunch of newbie programmers who compiled a program many times > before it ran (those were the other clowns in the class, not me, of course > :) ) this was the ideal balance. Even when I migrated to the IBM Fortran > "H" compiler (much better execution performance), Watfiv was still useful as > a debugging tool. > > Cheers, > Bill > > > Loren P Meissner wrote: > >> There was some Fortran language research going on at Univ of Waterloo (in >> Ont, Canada) by 1974. >> My copy of papers from JPL/SIGNUM Fortran Preprocessor Workshop (Nov 1974) >> [which was largely motivated by Fortran response to the "structured >> programming" fad] includes a one-page paper "Designing a portable >> preprocessor" by M Malcolm and L Rogers of Waterloo. It mentions "Altran >> translator and run-time support software are written in portable Fortran >> except for some M6 macro calls . The M6 macro processor is written in >> portable Fortran ." - Was this "portable Fortran" the same as "Waterloo >> Fortran"? >> >> Loren P Meissner >> (Have you ever imagined a world without hypothetical situations?) >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: j3-bounces@j3-fortran.org [mailto:j3-bounces@j3-fortran.org] On >> Behalf >> Of Bill Long >> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 3:03 PM >> To: fortran standards email list for J3 >> Cc: sc22wg5@open-std.org >> Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4198) RE: 43 Fortran compilers >> >> >> >> Ian D Chivers wrote: >> >>> I would be interested in knowing what they were. >>> >>> I worked at Imperial College from 1978-1986 On CDC kit mainly (6400, >>> 6500, 170, 174) and we had >>> CDC Fortran >>> Minnesota Fortran >>> >> >> Indeed, M77. I looked at the manual and found that, in 1980, M77 had the >> radical extension of A .op. B where op was and, or, xor, ... and A and B >> were numeric type variables, with the operations bitwise. Only 30 years >> ago. Maybe this idea needs a bit more time to mature. :) >> >> Cheers >> Bill >> >> >> As the main two supported Fortran compilers. >>> >>> I also vaguely remember a Waterloo Fortran. >>> >>> There was a CDC 1700 and I think that had a Fortran compiler. >>> Would that have counted as another compiler? >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> ian >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: j3-bounces@j3-fortran.org [mailto:j3-bounces@j3-fortran.org] On >>> Behalf Of David Muxworthy >>> Sent: 01 March 2010 17:47 >>> To: sc22wg5@open-std.org >>> Subject: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4197) 43 Fortran compilers >>> >>> One or two people seemed surprised when I said at the WG5 meeting that >>> there were 43 Fortran compilers in the early 1960s. The figure was taken >>> from Oswald, H. (1964), 'The various Fortrans', Datamation vol 10 (August), >>> pp 25-29. Oswald was reviewing 16 different Fortran systems. I think I >>> also said outside the meeting that the first Fortran on a non-IBM machine >>> was in 1961-2. In fact it was in 1960 on a Philco 2000, but not called >>> Fortran. The first non-IBM 'Fortran' was on a Univac SS80 in 1961. >>> >>> David >>> _______________________________________________ >>> J3 mailing list >>> J3@j3-fortran.org >>> http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> J3 mailing list >>> J3@j3-fortran.org >>> http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3 >>> >> >> > -- > Bill Long longb@cray.com > Fortran Technical Support & voice: 651-605-9024 > Bioinformatics Software Development fax: 651-605-9142 > Cray Inc./Cray Plaza, Suite 210/380 Jackson St./St. Paul, MN 55101 > > > _______________________________________________ > J3 mailing list > J3@j3-fortran.org > http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3 > -- Walt Brainerd --00c09f8de4949f11770480c7ba32 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Just to add to the confusion:
=A0
a) CDC has a Fortran compiler on the 1604 (Cray's first design,
perhaps, and
=A0
b) While a grad student at Purdue in the '60s, I used PUFFT, Purdu= e
U. Fast Fortran Translator, a system much like Watfor, that processed<= /div>
a while bunch of student Fortran jobs as one batch. I remember going
there and try a program consisting of END. It took something like
40 sec to process it as a regular IBM batch program. Hence PUFFT.
<= br>
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Bill Long <longb@cray.com> wrote:
I suspect the University of Waterloo compilers were Watfo= r and Watfiv. These are what were used in by the programming classes I took= as an undergrad (1969-73) on an IBM 360/65. =A0These "compilers"= were really interpreters that translated the code very quickly and produce= d detailed error messages, including at runtime. =A0The execution speed was= poor. However, for a bunch of newbie programmers who compiled a program ma= ny times before it ran (those were the other clowns in the class, not me, o= f course :) ) =A0this was the ideal balance. =A0Even when I migrated to the= IBM Fortran "H" compiler (much better execution performance), Wa= tfiv was still useful as a debugging tool.

Cheers,
Bill


Loren P Meissner wrote:
There was some Fortran language = research going on at Univ of Waterloo (in
Ont, Canada) by 1974.
My co= py of papers from JPL/SIGNUM Fortran Preprocessor Workshop (Nov 1974)
[which was largely motivated by Fortran response to the "structuredprogramming" fad] includes a one-page paper "Designing a portabl= e
preprocessor" by M Malcolm and L Rogers of Waterloo. It mentions = "Altran
translator and run-time support software are written in portable Fortranexcept for some M6 macro calls . The M6 macro processor is written in
p= ortable Fortran ." - Was this "portable Fortran" the same as= "Waterloo
Fortran"?

Loren P Meissner
(Have you ever imagined a world w= ithout hypothetical situations?)


-----Original Message-----
F= rom: j3-boun= ces@j3-fortran.org [mailto:j3-bounces@j3-fortran.org] On Behalf
Of Bill Long
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 3:03 PM
To: fortran standar= ds email list for J3
Cc: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.419= 8) RE: 43 Fortran compilers



Ian D Chivers wrote:
I would be interested in knowing= what they were.

I worked at Imperial College from 1978-1986 On CDC = kit mainly (6400, 6500, 170, 174) and we had
=A0 =A0CDC Fortran
=A0Minnesota Fortran

Indeed, M77.= =A0I looked at the manual and found that, in 1980, M77 had the
radical = extension of A .op. B where op was and, or, xor, ... and A and B
were nu= meric type variables, with the operations bitwise. =A0Only 30 years
ago. =A0Maybe this idea needs a bit more time to mature. :)

CheersBill


As the main two supported Fortra= n compilers.

I also vaguely remember a Waterloo Fortran.

Ther= e was a CDC 1700 and I think that had a Fortran compiler.
Would that have counted as another compiler?

Cheers

ian

-----Original Message-----
From: j3-bounces@j3-fortran.org [mailto:j3-bounces@j3-fortr= an.org] On Behalf Of David Muxworthy
Sent: 01 March 2010 17:47
To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Subject: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.419= 7) 43 Fortran compilers

One or two people seemed surprised when I sa= id at the WG5 meeting that there were 43 Fortran compilers in the early 196= 0s. =A0The figure was taken from Oswald, H. (1964), 'The various Fortra= ns', Datamation vol 10 (August), pp 25-29. =A0Oswald was reviewing 16 d= ifferent Fortran systems. =A0I think I also said outside the meeting that t= he first Fortran on a non-IBM machine was in 1961-2. =A0In fact it was in 1= 960 on a Philco 2000, but not called Fortran. =A0The first non-IBM 'For= tran' was on a Univac SS80 in 1961.

David
_______________________________________________
J3 mailing = list
J3@j3-fortra= n.org
http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

_______________________________________________
J3 mailing list
<= a href=3D"mailto:J3@j3-fortran.org" target=3D"_blank">J3@j3-fortran.org=
http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3


--
Bill Long =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 longb@cray.com
Fortran Technica= l Support =A0 =A0& =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 voice: 651-605-9024<= br> Bioinformatics Software Development =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0fax: =A0 651-605= -9142
Cray Inc./Cray Plaza, Suite 210/380 Jackson St./St. Paul, MN 55101=


_______________________________________________
J3 mailing l= ist
J3@j3-fortran= .org
htt= p://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3



--
Walt Brainerd
--00c09f8de4949f11770480c7ba32--