Home > Archive > Fortran > March 2006 > Integrated Developement Environment - looked for...
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Integrated Developement Environment - looked for...
|
|
| Phillip 2006-03-23, 8:04 am |
| Dear All,
I'm running XP Home. Does anybody know of a cheap / free IDE for Fortran
coding?
Thanks,
P
| |
| Arjen Markus 2006-03-23, 8:04 am |
| You could have a look at Photran - I do not know much about it, but it
seems to be a rather nice IDE ...
Regards,
Arjen
| |
| Vincent MAGNIN 2006-03-23, 8:04 am |
| Arjen Markus a écrit :
> You could have a look at Photran - I do not know much about it, but it
> seems to be a rather nice IDE ...
>
> Regards,
>
> Arjen
>
I tried it recently (on WinXP and Linux) and was really impressed ! It
is written in Java, so it is multiplatform. Photran can work with
several compilers, but comes with g95. This is the URL :
http://www.eclipse.org/photran/
Vincent
| |
| meek@skyway.usask.ca 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| In a previous article, "Phillip" <phillipt@waitrose.com> wrote:
>Dear All,
>
>I'm running XP Home. Does anybody know of a cheap / free IDE for Fortran
>coding?
>
>Thanks,
>
>P
>
>
www.openwatcom.org - free, very nice friendly IDE!
not so friendly runtime err messages ... but there is
a debug option (which I've never tried). WATCOM F77
has been my main Fortran for at least 10 years - lots
of useful extensions. People here are always complaining
that the extensions are not standard and won't run on
20 other brands of fortran - but I don't use any other
brand ( except once in a blue moon,vms F90), so it's fine with me.
Chris
| |
| Kevin G. Rhoads 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| > WATCOM F77 has been my main Fortran for at least 10 years
http://www.openwatcom.org/
Downside: F77 only
Upsides: C, C++ also available; runs on Extended-DOS, WIn16, WIN32, OS/2
Both IDE and ocmmand line tools
targets (from any of these) all of them and also Unextended-DOS, NLM, AutoCad extensions
Linux port in the works, opensource
| |
| Bernhard Enders 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| It's a shame to Fortran programmers but there is no decent IDE for
windows. You can try Photran or even MS Visual Studio 2005 (with Intel
Compiler), but they lack of code completion, code (or even intrinsic
function) hints, code folding, good syntax highligthing, user defined
completion, etc, etc, etc... It seems to me that if you wanna code in
Fortran you have to suffer, and despite this I still love to code in
Fortran... maybe it's time to visit a psychologist :-)
Bernhard.
| |
|
| maybe it is called xemacs, also available for windows, and it even
includes a psychologist.
Joost
| |
| Dan Nagle 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| Hi,
I'm using ED4W, which does the below-listed stuff.
It also has a built-in language, C-like, so it's extensible
as you will (or, as you are willing, I haven't tried it yet).
Bernhard Enders wrote:
> It's a shame to Fortran programmers but there is no decent IDE for
> windows. You can try Photran or even MS Visual Studio 2005 (with Intel
> Compiler), but they lack of code completion, code (or even intrinsic
> function) hints, code folding, good syntax highligthing, user defined
> completion, etc, etc, etc... It seems to me that if you wanna code in
> Fortran you have to suffer, and despite this I still love to code in
> Fortran... maybe it's time to visit a psychologist :-)
>
> Bernhard.
>
--
Cheers!
Dan Nagle
Purple Sage Computing Solutions, Inc.
| |
| Bernhard Enders 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| Are you sure xemacs can do all these things out of the box or there are
undisclosed secrets for these features? In this case I'm going to save
some money but not effort in configuring it. Thanks,
Bernhard.
| |
| i.chivers@ntlworld.com 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| you might want to have a look at
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/kis/support/ci...n_resources.pdf
there is a whole chapter on fortran aware editors and development
environments.
hope this helps.
Phillip wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I'm running XP Home. Does anybody know of a cheap / free IDE for Fortran
> coding?
>
> Thanks,
>
> P
| |
| Phillip 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| Thank you!
I knew I'd seen something like that somewhere.
And thank you to everyone else for their kind assistance.
Phil
<i.chivers@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1143129798.069333.43750@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> you might want to have a look at
>
> http://www.kcl.ac.uk/kis/support/ci...n_resources.pdf
>
> there is a whole chapter on fortran aware editors and development
> environments.
>
> hope this helps.
>
> Phillip wrote:
>
| |
| Bart Vandewoestyne 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| On 2006-03-23, Vincent MAGNIN <vincent.magnin@falsemail.fornospam.fr> wrote:
>
> I tried it recently (on WinXP and Linux) and was really impressed ! It
> is written in Java, so it is multiplatform. Photran can work with
> several compilers, but comes with g95. This is the URL :
> http://www.eclipse.org/photran/
Can anybody tell me under what licence photran is released? Is
it Open Source under GNU GPL? I can't seem to find anything
about the license on http://www.eclipse.org/photran/
Regards,
Bart
--
"Share what you know. Learn what you don't."
| |
| Lynn McGuire 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| > http://www.openwatcom.org/
>
> Downside: F77 only
> Upsides: C, C++ also available; runs on Extended-DOS, WIn16, WIN32, OS/2
> Both IDE and ocmmand line tools
> targets (from any of these) all of them and also Unextended-DOS, NLM, AutoCad extensions
> Linux port in the works, opensource
There are a number of F90 extensions already in the Open Watcom F77 compiler:
> List of F90 compliant extensions in Watcom Fortran compiler.
>
> http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=44419
FORTRAN 90 Compliant Extensions
The following Watcom FORTRAN 77 extensions are 100% ANSI Compliant with FORTRAN 90:
1. The INCLUDE statement for embedding source from another file is supported.
INCLUDE 'SRC'
2. Symbolic names can be 31 characters long (names are unique up to 32 characters). In addition, underscore (_) and lowercase
letters are allowed in symbolic names.
3. Lowercase and uppercase letters are treated in the same way except in:
· Character and hollerith constants
· Apostrophe and H-edit descriptors
4. End-of-line comments are permitted.
PRINT *, 'Hello world' ! print 'Hello World'
5. The IMPLICIT NONE statement is supported.
6. Both character and non-character data are allowed in the same common block.
INTEGER X
CHARACTER C
COMMON /BLK/ X, C
7. The ALLOCATE and DEALLOCATE statements may be used to dynamically allocate and deallocate arrays.
8. The following additional I/O specifiers for the OPEN statement are supported:
ACTION=
RECL= (permitted for files opened for sequential access)
9. The following additional I/O specifiers for the INQUIRE statement are supported:
ACTION=
10. The NAMELIST statement is supported.
11. The Z-edit descriptor is allowed for displaying data in hexadecimal format.
12. Functions may be invoked via the CALL statement. This allows the return value of functions to be ignored.
13. The following additional program structure control statements are supported:
EXIT
CYCLE
| |
| meek@skyway.usask.ca 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| In a previous article, "Lynn McGuire" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>There are a number of F90 extensions already in the Open Watcom F77 compiler:
>
>
>FORTRAN 90 Compliant Extensions
>The following Watcom FORTRAN 77 extensions are 100% ANSI Compliant with FORTRAN 90:
>1. The INCLUDE statement for embedding source from another file is supported.
> INCLUDE 'SRC'
>2. Symbolic names can be 31 characters long (names are unique up to 32 characters). In addition, underscore (_) and lowercase
>letters are allowed in symbolic names.
>3. Lowercase and uppercase letters are treated in the same way except in:
>· Character and hollerith constants
>· Apostrophe and H-edit descriptors
>4. End-of-line comments are permitted.
> PRINT *, 'Hello world' ! print 'Hello World'
>5. The IMPLICIT NONE statement is supported.
>6. Both character and non-character data are allowed in the same common block.
> INTEGER X
> CHARACTER C
> COMMON /BLK/ X, C
>7. The ALLOCATE and DEALLOCATE statements may be used to dynamically allocate and deallocate arrays.
>8. The following additional I/O specifiers for the OPEN statement are supported:
> ACTION=
> RECL= (permitted for files opened for sequential access)
>9. The following additional I/O specifiers for the INQUIRE statement are supported:
> ACTION=
>10. The NAMELIST statement is supported.
>11. The Z-edit descriptor is allowed for displaying data in hexadecimal format.
>12. Functions may be invoked via the CALL statement. This allows the return value of functions to be ignored.
>13. The following additional program structure control statements are supported:
> EXIT
> CYCLE
>
>
.. What he said ..
but the additional things I find really useful
ability to read and write true binary data -
that is the amount written and read is determined by
the parameter list, nothing is lost between the cracks-
e.g. the read statement doesn't have to know what
lengths were written (use 'unformatted' and record type ='fixed').
and
The ability to control/read ports/memor. directly from fortran using
PRAGMAs (assembler language functions/subroutines ...
.. don't ask me, what do I know, but I use them and they work.)
which are part of the fortran source .
There are other features as well (DOS only) - a simple
graphics utility e.g.
and
selectable target ( dos16,32 ... windows3.1/95/98/xp )
and
command line parameters
system calls
......
Chris
| |
| Michael Prager 2006-03-23, 7:04 pm |
| "Bernhard Enders" <bgeneto@gmail.com> wrote:
>Are you sure xemacs can do all these things out of the box or there are
>undisclosed secrets for these features? In this case I'm going to save
>some money but not effort in configuring it. Thanks,
The biggest flaw I saw in emacs when I last tried it was the
combination of horrid (to me! I know many love them!) default
key bindings and having to learn emacs-lisp to change them.
Other editors lack some of your desired features but changing
key bindings is much easier, even on the fly.
--
Mike Prager, NOAA, Beaufort, NC
Address spam-trapped; remove color to reply.
* Opinions expressed are personal and not represented otherwise.
* Any use of tradenames does not constitute a NOAA endorsement.
| |
|
| m @skyway.usask.ca wrote:
>
> www.openwatcom.org - free, very nice friendly IDE!
Indeed, and probably the one that "spawned" Visual Studio IDE by the
MS "innovators". Ditto for many extensions that found their way into MS
Fortran.
| |
| Gib Bogle 2006-03-25, 4:00 am |
| Bernhard Enders wrote:
> It's a shame to Fortran programmers but there is no decent IDE for
> windows. You can try Photran or even MS Visual Studio 2005 (with Intel
> Compiler), but they lack of code completion, code (or even intrinsic
> function) hints, code folding, good syntax highligthing, user defined
> completion, etc, etc, etc... It seems to me that if you wanna code in
> Fortran you have to suffer, and despite this I still love to code in
> Fortran... maybe it's time to visit a psychologist :-)
This is way OT, and may offend, but I note that you have a good command
of English, and that implies that you probably care about correct
grammar. The word "wanna" is not part of English, it is a horrible
Americanism, and conveys an impression of illiteracy. Instead you want
to say "want to".
| |
| Dmitry Gorbatovsky 2006-03-25, 4:00 am |
| Phillip wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I'm running XP Home. Does anybody know of a cheap / free IDE for Fortran
> coding?
>
> Thanks,
>
> P
It is common that if some one
like to use professional tool
he should be prepared to
step learning curve.
Take one of emacs family ,
stay with it for one w.
(no matter how hard it would
be for the first few hours)
And you could not find better
IDE for the rest of your work.
--
*It is easy to lie with statistics, but it's a lot easier to lie without
them.
| |
| Joe Krahn 2006-03-25, 7:01 pm |
| Bernhard Enders wrote:
> It's a shame to Fortran programmers but there is no decent IDE for
> windows. You can try Photran or even MS Visual Studio 2005 (with Intel
> Compiler), but they lack of code completion, code (or even intrinsic
> function) hints, code folding, good syntax highligthing, user defined
> completion, etc, etc, etc... It seems to me that if you wanna code in
> Fortran you have to suffer, and despite this I still love to code in
> Fortran... maybe it's time to visit a psychologist :-)
>
> Bernhard.
>
Having used MS Visual Studio, I find the use of an IDE more of a
di vantage, at least the way Microsoft implements it. For example, the
dependency rules are hidden, and occasionally break. This leads to
searching for answers to issues that could be easily resolved if
everything was not so black-boxed.
The places where an IDE are useful are syntax hints and highlighting in
the editor, and debugging with code display in the same editor. GVim has
good highlighting, but not syntax highlighting. For me, if GVim had
syntax hints and could run as the debugger display, that would be the
ultimate IDE. The only hard part is leaning how to create good Makefiles.
In any case, good IDE's should work by building Makefiles, then running
'make'. Microsoft used to do this, but it got complicated due to a
really poor 'make'. Instead of a smarter make, they switched to a
horribly bloated and convoluted .NET mess. Also, portability of projects
is bad: it is nearly impossible to share project files across computers
unless directories are set up exactly the same.
In summary, a good IDE would be nice, but I have not yet seen one that
functions as well as gnu-make and a good syntax-highlighting editor. I
have more hopes for the future of Open-Source IDE's than anything MS can
produce.
| |
| Brooks Moses 2006-03-25, 10:00 pm |
| Gib Bogle wrote:
> Bernhard Enders wrote:
>
> This is way OT, and may offend, but I note that you have a good command
> of English, and that implies that you probably care about correct
> grammar. The word "wanna" is not part of English, it is a horrible
> Americanism, and conveys an impression of illiteracy. Instead you want
> to say "want to".
Your opinion that the correct use of correctly-spelled informal
colloquialisms on Usenet conveys an impression of illiteracy is not by
any means universal. Literacy means being able to use the language
competently, and that includes deliberately using "horrible
Americanisms" when one has reason to; e.g., when one is intentionally
being informal, as Bernhard clearly was.
Meanwhile, my noting that the Oxford English Dictionary includes the
word "wanna" and does not identify it as an Americanism is not being
literate, it's being a smartarse.
- Brooks, distinguishing between "colloquialism" and "intentional poor
spelling" here. "U" for "you" is an offensive abomination, and should
only be used when such is intended.
--
The "bmoses-nospam" address is valid; no unmunging needed.
| |
| Gib Bogle 2006-03-26, 4:01 am |
| Brooks Moses wrote:
> Gib Bogle wrote:
>
>
>
> Your opinion that the correct use of correctly-spelled informal
> colloquialisms on Usenet conveys an impression of illiteracy is not by
> any means universal. Literacy means being able to use the language
> competently, and that includes deliberately using "horrible
> Americanisms" when one has reason to; e.g., when one is intentionally
> being informal, as Bernhard clearly was.
Interesting that you should say that. My impression of his post in this
thread, and his other posts, is that he writes correct English, no
(other) sign of colloquialisms.
The fact that my opinion about "wanna" isn't universally shared just
shows that some people have the wrong opinion ;-).
| |
|
| Joe Krahn wrote:
>
> In summary, a good IDE would be nice, but I have not yet seen one...
Even if you did, wouldn't an application IDE be even nicer, unless
you're content with the prospect of Intel retro "ide", that is,
command-line drudgery of the bygone days of DECs et al.
| |
| Kevin G. Rhoads 2006-03-28, 7:02 pm |
| >that is, command-line drudgery of the bygone days
With all due respect, your prejudices are not laws of nature. Drudgery is in the mind of whosoever
is acting. Your drudgery is my joy, and, apparently, vice versa.
I PREFER using the command line for compiling. I prefer using the command line for lots of things,
and I find it easier, more convenient and faster than firing up some memory hogging IDE. I don't
expect that everyone will prefer doing things the way I do.
But since I am a touch typist with a fairly good memory, I prefer typing in commands to taking
my fingers off the home row and mousing to some indeterminant place, that varies from one IDE to
the next, to drop down some flipping stupidity that leads to some other stupidity that eventually
gets me to something that will do what I want. To me, all that seems a giant step backward.
To me, the drudgery is being forced to use a WIMP interface for things I'd rather do from a command
line. Such as renaming a large group of related files.
That the Intel Fortran compiler in present form forces you to use the command line or get an additional
piece of software is a legitimate complaint. But don't try to expand that into some law of nature.
| |
| jussij@zeusedit.com 2006-03-29, 7:02 pm |
| > I'm running XP Home. Does anybody know of a cheap / free IDE
> for Fortran coding?
The Zeus for Windows IDE has class browsing, code folding and
syntax highlighting for the Fortran language:
http://www.zeusedit.com/fortran.html
It has programmer specific features like macro scripting, version
control, smart indenting, project/workspace management etc and is
easily configured to run almost any third party compiler, linker,
maker or builder:
http://www.zeusedit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32
Note: Zeus is shareware (45 day trial).
Jussi Jumppanen
Author: Zeus for Windows
|
|
|
|
|