Article View: comp.org.decus
Article #629Re: better ratfor ?
From: Ben Cranston
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1986 05:16
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1986 05:16
26 lines
1443 bytes
1443 bytes
In article <1724@ncoast.UUCP> btb@ncoast.UUCP (Brad Banko) writes:
> As an example, the ratfor for loop:
> for (i=1; i<=n; i = i + 1)
>translates into the horrible:
> i = 1
> if (.not. (i .le. n)) goto (end of loop)
> ...
> i = i + 1 (goto if)
> (end of loop)
> rather than into the much more efficient:
> i = 1
> if (i .gt. n) goto (end of loop)
> ...
> i = i + 1 (etc.)
> (end of loop)
Gosh, any Fortran compiler that doesn't produce the same or similar code
for these two cases sure seems suspect - are you sure there isn't an
"optimize" switch that you could invoke?
--
umd5.UUCP <= {seismo!umcp-cs,ihnp4!rlgvax}!cvl!umd5!zben
Ben Cranston zben @ umd2.UMD.EDU Kingdom of Merryland Sperrows 1100/92
umd2.BITNET "via HASP with RSCS"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1374@umd5>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mimsy!cvl!umd5!zbenReferences:
<1724@ncoast.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mimsy!cvl!umd5!zben From: zben@umd5 (Ben Cranston) Newsgroups: comp.org.decus,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: better ratfor ? Message-ID: <1374@umd5> Date: Mon, 24-Nov-86 00:16:45 EST Article-I.D.: umd5.1374 Posted: Mon Nov 24 00:16:45 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 24-Nov-86 21:11:27 EST References: <1724@ncoast.UUCP> Reply-To: zben@umd5.umd.edu (Ben Cranston) Organization: University of Maryland, College Park Lines: 26 Keywords: ratfor, fortran, optimize, f77 Summary: Why not add optimization to f77...