Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?

[Steven Ryan]

[Suddenly, a pittrap opens beneath our hero's toes. From the darkness are
heard faint cries of `my mainframe is bigger than your mainframe.' He neatly
pirouettes out of danger.]

>Then again depending on the machine archetecture, access to something
>mapped to a stack frame may be cheaper and faster than statically
>...

I see three possibilities:

(1) On the hardware, static nonrecursive code is faster than stack-based
recursive code. Fortran wins; C loses.

(2) Static and stack code are equally well supported. Fortran wins; C wins.

(3) Stack code is faster than nonrecursive static code. C wins. Also, Fortran
wins. Although a standard conforming *program* cannot be recursive, the
implementation is unrestricted. A compiler can map a program into static
nonrecursive code, stack-based recursive code, heap-based multithreaded
recursive and reentrant code, or anything else as long as it accepts
nonrecursive code.

Is this cheating? Well.....

This is a case of underconstraining the solution so that the implementor has
greater freedom of action. A Fortran compiler writer has that many fewer
constraints than C hence that much more freedom. The Fortran compiler may
not be better but certainly will not be worse.

This is similar to the alias ban in Fortran. [NO! I'm starting that again.
This is just a fer instance, not an agreement/disagreement.] The Fortran
optimiser can depend on the alias ban to produce better code than C. Doesn't
have to, and it won't effect a conforming program either way.

In general, the fewer constraints that are put on a compiler, or any other
program, the more freedom the programmer has for getting any particular
implementation fast.

                                Hafa an godne daege.
                                             sm ryan

----------------------------------------
Bucky Bug sez:
    Poor Mother Earth..
    No one takes care of her in her old age..
                       - Odd Bodkins