From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <13426df10803011336j67f55103o94774f587b74242c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat,  1 Mar 2008 13:36:44 -0800
From: "ron minnich" <rminnich@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] GCC/G++: some stress testing
In-Reply-To: <1f1915003de6842de9c38c16c353821a@plan9.bell-labs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <13426df10803010913w4325a6e9p54a5e4575b6d1754@mail.gmail.com>
	<1f1915003de6842de9c38c16c353821a@plan9.bell-labs.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 6b6ea482-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 12:29 PM,  <geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> Ron, I think you're confusing ratfor with software tools.  There was a
>  ratfor implementation in C on Unix, and I wrote ratfor when I had to
>  use Fortran, and others did too, independent of the software tools
>  effort.  The point of Ratfor was to make Fortran bearable; I can't
>  imagine writing bare Fortran any more.

You're right. My mistake. No more stones. Sorry brucee.

ron