BVAUGHAN@pucc.Princeton.EDU (Barbara Vaughan) (09/28/90)
I'm planning to get a new Fortran compiler for my new 80386 computer (Dell System 310, with math coprocessor. At present, I have two Fortran compilers: Lahey F77L, version 2.11, with which I have been very satisfied; and Microsoft Fortran version 3.2, with which I have been moderately satisfied. I need a compiler that will compile code for machines without a math coprocessor, which is why I use the Microsoft compiler from time to time. However, I could continue to use my old compiler for that purpose. I am looking for reviews and personal recommendations for the latest versions of both the Lahey and Micro- soft Fortrans. I'm especially interested in the ability to use expanded mem- ory and any other improvements that will take advavtage of my 386. If there is another compiler I haven't mentioned that is clearly head and shoulders above the two I have mentioned, I would like to hear about those, too. Thanks very much Barbara Vaughan BVAUGHAN@PUCC.Princeton.edu
ndoduc@framentec.fr (Nhuan Doduc) (10/02/90)
In <11771@pucc.Princeton.EDU> BVAUGHAN@pucc.Princeton.EDU (Barbara Vaughan) writes: >I'm planning to get a new Fortran compiler for my new 80386 computer (Dell >System 310, with math coprocessor. At present, I have two Fortran compilers: >Lahey F77L, version 2.11, with which I have been very satisfied; and Microsoft >Fortran version 3.2, with which I have been moderately satisfied. I need a >compiler that will compile code for machines without a math coprocessor, which >is why I use the Microsoft compiler from time to time. However, I could >continue to use my old compiler for that purpose. I am looking for reviews and >personal recommendations for the latest versions of both the Lahey and Micro- >soft Fortrans. I'm especially interested in the ability to use expanded mem- >ory and any other improvements that will take advavtage of my 386. If there >is another compiler I haven't mentioned that is clearly head and shoulders >above the two I have mentioned, I would like to hear about those, too. Thanks >very much >Barbara Vaughan >BVAUGHAN@PUCC.Princeton.edu Since version 3, Lahey allows floating emulation while MicroSoft has always done this (altmath lib or /FPa in version 4 and now 5) so I still recommend Lahey which, from my personal view point, is superior to Microsoft. If you want to taste 386 new potentialities, the MicroWay's is a must; Lahey is also not bad. Polyhedron's FTN 386/486 even can take advantage of the 486. To my knowledge, FTN/486 is the only one that uses the extended mode (with a Dos extender) and that is sensitive to the existence of the coprocessor at run time Have fun ! --nh Nhuan DODUC, Framentec-Cognitech, Paris, France, ndoduc@framentec.fr or ndoduc@cognitech.fr, Association Francaise des Utilisateurs d'Unix, France, doduc@afuu.fr
kkim@plains.NoDak.edu (kyongsok kim) (02/12/91)
I am looking for fortran compilers running on 386/486 which can compile fortran source programs containing big arrays (say, 2 MB). As I understand it, MS-DOS on ordinary PC's supports up to 640 KB. Suppose that a 386/486 machine has 4 MB and I want to define big arrays so that the program size is, say, 2 MB. As I understand it, to do this, we need to have a fortran compiler enabling us to access extended memory in a protected mode. The rumor is that it costs around $1,000 and, before buying it, I would like to hear good or bad stories of those compilers from the first-hand users. Any help will be appreciated. Since I do not read this newsgroup regularly, please reply to me directly. Thanks in advance. Kyongsok Kim Dept. of Comp. Sci., North Dakota State University e-mail: kkim@plains.nodak.edu; kkim@plains.bitnet; ...!uunet!plains!kkim