🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9602120400.AA02232@ues5.cern.ch>, Dan Pop <Dan.Pop@cern.ch> wrote:

> bouldin@enh.nist.gov (Charles Bouldin) writes:
> 
> >In article <9602092127.AA24456@ues5.cern.ch>, Dan Pop
> ><danpop@ues5.cern.ch> wrote:
> >
> >> of the code is left untouched.  That is, unless the port is to MacOS and
> >> the portable part has to be stuffed with WaitNextEvent calls.
> >> 
> >> Dan
> >> -- 
> >> Dan Pop
> >> CERN, CN Division
> >
> >Do you *read* the posts in this thread? 
> 
> Yes, I do.  Unlike you, I read them carefully.
> 
> >Or do you just keep repeating
> >yourself regardless of what anyone else says? How can you work at CERN and
> >be unaware that the number crunching codes that you speak of are mostly
> >fortran.
> 
> I never mentioned the word "Fortran" in any of my articles.  CPU-bound
> programs can be written in any language.
> 
> >As I and several others have pointed out, 2 different fortran
> >compilers on the Mac AUTOMATICALLY put in WaitNextEvent calls. The
> >portable source code remains completely untouched. I've ported over
> >100,000 lines of fortran that way, and it works fine.
> 
> Unless I missed something, this thread was not about Fortran programming,
> so your examples are irrelevant.  Now, you can stop reposting them ad
> nauseam. 
> 
> Apparently, Apple hasn't written its floppy formatting utility in Fortran,
> and this shows :-)  Ditto for printing in foreground.

There is no "floppy formatting utility" on a Mac. Normally the Finder
handles that, as well as printing in the foreground. The Finder only does
one of these tasks in the foreground at a time, but if you would like to
use a "floppy formatting utility", like Disk Charmer, you can format in
the background to your hearts delight. Ditto with printing.
JW

-- 
John Warwick
john_warwick@mindlink.bc.ca