[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: f2c obsolete?
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: f2c obsolete? |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Oct 2007 02:17:03 -0400 |
On 24-Oct-2007, Michael Goffioul wrote:
| On 10/23/07, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
| > On 23-Oct-2007, Michael Goffioul wrote:
| >
| > | Yes. This will break compilation under MSVC, which relies on f2c.
| >
| > Why would it break compilation using f2c if there were a wrapper
| > script for f2c+$CC that acted as a compiler?
|
| If you provide an equivalent pseudo fortran compiler, then I guess
| it would be OK. Although I'm pretty sure other problems will pop
| up :-)
Sure, but having a script would significantly simplify the configure
script and then if there are problems we can just say "get a real
Fortran compiler or fix the f2c wrapper so that it works".
jwe
- f2c obsolete?, John W. Eaton, 2007/10/23
- Re: f2c obsolete?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/10/23
- Re: f2c obsolete?, John W. Eaton, 2007/10/23
- Re: f2c obsolete?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?,
John W. Eaton <=
- Re: f2c obsolete?, John W. Eaton, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, John W. Eaton, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, John W. Eaton, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, John W. Eaton, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, Thomas Treichl, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, John W. Eaton, 2007/10/24
- Re: f2c obsolete?, Thomas Treichl, 2007/10/24