[J3] [EXTERNAL] [BULK] Re: A couple more ideas for features

Vipul Parekh parekhvs at gmail.com
Sun Apr 9 16:14:34 UTC 2023


On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 10:13 PM Malcolm Cohen via J3 <
j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:

> ..
>
> In my opinion the existing forms are better than random non-letter
> characters. By a long way.
>


This choice, whether to use an existing form e.g., .xyz., or a "random
non-letter character" is best left to the programmers.  This is clearly a
case where it should not up to any one here to inform them what is best for
them.

The standard-bearers for Fortran should ever strive to provide a more
expressive language for Formula Translation, otherwise it does a disservice
to the decades of work on Fortran starting from its very inception and the
investment in it by the practitioners.

Say someone has authored what they think is a performant solution for their
needs toward matrix operations of transpose, Ax = B solution, etc.
Currently the author can define an operator with a "non-letter character"
(/) for matrix right division, but not the left division.

But now "\" is not "random", it is well-accepted for the matrix left
division.

Why is the Fortran practitioner disallowed from defining an operator( \ )?

It does not make sense.

Vipul Parekh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20230409/ac095a6c/attachment.htm>


More information about the J3 mailing list