30 Mar
2007
30 Mar
'07
1:37 p.m.
--- Guy Sotomayor <ggs at shiresoft.com> wrote:
I wrote the 8087 support for the IBM Fortran
compiler (actually a set of
library routines) to prove to IBM management that
there was benefit to
having the 8087 as an option (they actually wanted
to remove the
socket). And they needed something that would
actually *use* the 8087.
Hi. Yes an old post, but what prompted me was the
recent thread on FORTRAN compilers. Which IBM compiler
are we talking about? I do believe there were actually
2 IBM branded versions, one by M$ of course, and the
other (dubbed IBM Professional FORTRAN 1.0) was by
Ryan-McFarland, said to be a truly F77 compliant
implementation, unlike M$'s. At least by one MIT
graduate who used it, and also by it's said manual. Or
if IIRC "to the best of IBM's ability to understand
the spec" ;).
I was just curious :)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
OK, there necver was an 80289 (or whatever), hut
you can bet Intel would
have made one if there'd been a demand (read
: It
would have gone into
> the IBM PC/AT).