News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Fortran. Parent comment

Re:Fortran by noobermin on Monday August 28, 2023 @01:38PM (#37297710)
I once noticed the thing is people balk at the line length in fortran as if it is some archaic hold off (which it is somewhat) that proves its obsolescence but in the next breath berate everyone for not using a formatter that will chunk lines into 100 characters in their favorite "modern" language. I guess the problem is fortran chose 80 as the line length and not 100.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by Koshkin on Monday August 28, 2023 @02:07PM (#37298160)
> as if it is some archaic hold off (which it is somewhat)

Indeed it is! The standard IBM punch card had 80 columns.

> and not 100

The standard IBM printer models had 120 print positions.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by pklausler on Monday August 28, 2023 @02:17PM (#37298333)
It is 80 for "fixed form" (card image) source files. It is 132 for free form modern source, but adjustable on the compiler command line. LLVM Flang uses the line length only for emitting optional portability warnings.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by dboreham on Monday August 28, 2023 @03:13PM (#37299058)
100?? Obviously 132 is the correct line length.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by actinium226 on Monday August 28, 2023 @03:40PM (#37299402)
But mah punch cards!
[ Parent | on HN ]