19 Dec
2021
19 Dec
'21
8:37 p.m.
there was a commercial package called Spag i which
claimed to un-spagatti-ify your code which i always wanted but, could never afford.
You needed struct(1) in v7. It did precisely that, converting Fortran
to Ratfor. Amazingly (to me, anyway) it embodied a theorem: a Fortran
program has a canonical form. People found the converted code to be
easier to understand--even when they had written the original code
themselves.
Doug
20 Dec
20 Dec
7:19 a.m.
New subject: {TUHS} efl
You needed struct(1) in v7.
You mentioned this before
(https://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/2020-March/020670.html)
Personally, I don't know why Brenda Baker isn't famous.
People found the converted code to be easier to
understand--even
when they had written the original code themselves.
I ran it on a number of Fortran programs in the EE department
at the U of MD. When it *didn't* resolve loops into Ratfor
style WHILE constructs and the like, it usually meant there was
a bug. I found at least two or three bugs this way.
Chris
1098
days inactive
1099
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Chris Torek -
Douglas McIlroy