------- Additional Comments From rrr6399 at futuretek dot com 2005-09-11 23:22 ------- I'm not sure why I'm getting so much pushback on this silly thing.
I realize that disagreeing with the assumptions made during the design may be regarded by some as "rants", but what I was attempting to do (perhaps poorly) is illustrate why simple decisions that might seem fairly benign can have huge efficiency impacts on a large population of users. There has been a pattern of these decisions made over the years that have wasted thousands (if not millions) of hours of people's precious time. (Big Endian vs. Little Endian, \ versus /, CR vs CR/LF vs LF, 8 byte vs 4 byte markers, etc.) If you read some of the previous comments, you'll see that some don't think it's an issue. It really is a problem that should take high priority. I know Bud is going to apply a variation of the patch he wrote a few months ago soon and I'm happy about that. I hope there isn't any pushback from the rest of the developers. I think the default should actually be 4 byte markers, but that's just my humble opinion. BTW, I think both spellings of FORTRAN (FORmula TRANslation) are correct actually: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/languages/fortran/ch1-1.html http://www.engin.umd.umich.edu/CIS/course.des/cis400/fortran/fortran.html (Not that it really matters in the big scheme of things.) I'll also post a small C program to convert to the g77 format soon as a temporary fix until the patch is in place. (I'm completely hammered with work right now, but I'll try to contribute more in the future. I've already sent in some code snippets on the little endian/big endian issue.) Also, if I wanted to be condescended to I'd go talk to my wife. :-) I hope that we can all keep this professional in the future and respect people's time (development, trouble shooting and bug reporting) that they put into this to help make a better product for everybody. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23814