Phillip Helbig wrote:
>
> From: SMTP%"[log in to unmask]" 16-FEB-2000 00:17:56.89
>
> > > o in the normal mathematical sense, e.g. A*(B+C) >as shorthand for
> > > A*B+A*C
> >
> > It's not just shorthand; this grouping may often improve accuracy;
> > thus Fortran, unlike other languages, permits the compiler to transform
> > the latter into the former.
>
> Right, but not the former into the latter. Suppose that would be
> better, for some reason. The new notation would allow that, while
> keeping the expression the same conceptually.
It looks a good idea to me. Mainly since it is fully backward compatible.
In fact the most current cases would be then {} or []. We don't often need a
true (). Rigth ?
Pierre
--
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Pierre Hugonnet | mail....CGG |
| | 1, rue Leon Migaux |
| Seismic Data Processing R&D | 91341 MASSY cedex |
| | FRANCE |
| COMPAGNIE GENERALE DE GEOPHYSIQUE | phone...(33) 164 47 45 59 |
| Massy processing centre (France) | fax.....(33) 164 47 32 49 |
| http://www.cgg.com | [log in to unmask] |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------+
My opinions are not necessarily those of CGG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|