Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 06:17:42 -0700 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@missouri.edu> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FORTRAN vs. Fortran (was: November 5th is Clang-Day) Message-ID: <20121102131742.GB79087@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <5093BC40.8@missouri.edu> References: <201211021021.qA2ALJLF020996@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> <5093BC40.8@missouri.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 07:27:44AM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: > > caNyO usti llputw hitespa cewhere ever you like in for TraN? > Sigh. You can get copies of the final committee drafts of the Fortran 95, 2003, and 2008 standards. There you will learn that Fortran since Fortran 90 allows two source forms: fixed-form and free-form source code. When parsing the the above nonsense you wrote, one form would yield one (invalid) token, and in the other form it would yield 11 tokens. -- Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121102131742.GB79087>