🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <GESSEL.91Jan4105720@masada.cs.swarthmore.edu> gessel@masada.cs.swarthmore.edu (Daniel Mark Gessel) writes:
>>Well, if you write a FORTRAN interpreter in C, I don't see how you can
>>say that FORTRAN is not a subset of C.  
>   -- Darren
>You have missed the point completely. If you can write a FORTRAN
>interpreter in C, C is as powerful or more than FORTRAN. 

Actually, I hadn't missed the point.  I was asking an Aristotelian/rhetorical
question of Dan to show where I though he had missed the point. The first
statement was "Here is how to do FORTRAN in C, does that make it a subset?"
and Dan said (essentially) "No, because there is FORTRAN syntax that C can't
handle." and I responded "Name some."  I got the point, and Dan probably
got the point but seems to me to have brought up a specious argument that
intentionally missed the point in order to continue the argument.
Maybe this was not intended, but it seemed that way to me.

>A language without any form of dynamic allocation is going to be weak,
>(is FORTRAN like this?).

Actually, most assembler languages don't have dynamic allocation. I would
think you could handle it in FORTRAN the same as in assembler.
Hmmm...  on second thought, that doesn't answer the question, does it :-)
(Disclaimer: I have not looked at FORTRAN in ~7 years. Maybe it has
dynamic allocation by now.)

              -- Darren
-- 
--- Darren New --- Grad Student --- CIS --- Univ. of Delaware ---
----- Network Protocols, Graphics, Programming Languages, 
      Formal Description Techniques (esp. Estelle), Coffee, Amigas -----
              =+=+=+ Let GROPE be an N-tuple where ... +=+=+=