 |
 |
Hi, Some of the problem is with floating-point literals. What if the spec were to say that if a literal does not have a KIND specified, it is to be interpreted as the "greatest" kind that the implementation supports (rather than the default kind)? For instance, in "REAL a; a= 1./7.", 1. and 7. might be interpreted as, say, DOUBLE PRECISION constants. It seems to me that this simple proposal would solve a lot of gotchas that arise when, say, you want to take old code with an expression such as the above and make "a" DOUBLE PRECISION instead. -P. -- Peter S. Shenkin Schrodinger, Inc. VP, Software Development 120 W. 45th St., 32nd Floor 646 366 9555 x111 Tel New York, NY 10036 646 366 9550 FAX USERID: shenkin http://www.schrodinger.com DOMAIN: schrodinger DOT com Pre-arranged conf. calls: 702-759-8420 or 888-867-7084; passcode 646-366