Announcing "Modern Fortran Explained", Metcalf, Reid & Cohen (OUP,
April 2011).

Fortran remains one of the principal programming languages used in
high-performance
scientific, numerical, and engineering computing. A series of
significant revisions
to the standard versions of the language have progressively enhanced
its capabilities, and the latest standard =96 Fortran 2008 =96 includes
many modern
features, such as object orientation, coarrays for parallel
programming,
interoperability with C, and various other enhancements.

"Modern Fortran Explained" (MFE) expands on its predecessor, "Fortran
95/2003
Explained" (MRC). The opening chapters, completely revised, contain a
complete description of Fortran 95, extended by the allocatable
array features of Fortran 2003. There follow chapters describing the
other
additional features of Fortran 2003, then new chapters on coarrays and
the many
other enhancements of Fortran 2008. The distinction between the three
language
levels is kept clear throughout.

Written by leading experts in the field, two of whom have actively
contributed to Fortran 2008, this is a complete and authoritative
description of
Fortran in its modern form. It is intended for new and existing users
of the
language, and for all those involved in scientific and numerical
computing.
It is suitable as a textbook for teaching and, with its extensive
Appendices
and Index, as a handy reference for practitioners.

For more details see, for example:

www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ComputerScience/ProgrammingLanguageT=
heory/?view=3Dusa&ci=3D9780199601424

(to be published in April)

or

http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199601424.do

(already available).

or the usual sites.

Michael Metcalf, John Reid, Malcolm Cohen,

Thanks for the announcement.

I have been borrowing a copy of the first edition of this book, and I 
like it very much. I think I'll get a copy of the new edition.

Daniel.


On 03/25/2011 09:35 AM, m_b_metcalf wrote:
> Announcing "Modern Fortran Explained", Metcalf, Reid&  Cohen (OUP,
> April 2011).
>
> Fortran remains one of the principal programming languages used in
> high-performance
> scientific, numerical, and engineering computing. A series of
> significant revisions
> to the standard versions of the language have progressively enhanced
> its capabilities, and the latest standard � Fortran 2008 � includes
> many modern
> features, such as object orientation, coarrays for parallel
> programming,
> interoperability with C, and various other enhancements.
>
> "Modern Fortran Explained" (MFE) expands on its predecessor, "Fortran
> 95/2003
> Explained" (MRC). The opening chapters, completely revised, contain a
> complete description of Fortran 95, extended by the allocatable
> array features of Fortran 2003. There follow chapters describing the
> other
> additional features of Fortran 2003, then new chapters on coarrays and
> the many
> other enhancements of Fortran 2008. The distinction between the three
> language
> levels is kept clear throughout.
>
> Written by leading experts in the field, two of whom have actively
> contributed to Fortran 2008, this is a complete and authoritative
> description of
> Fortran in its modern form. It is intended for new and existing users
> of the
> language, and for all those involved in scientific and numerical
> computing.
> It is suitable as a textbook for teaching and, with its extensive
> Appendices
> and Index, as a handy reference for practitioners.
>
> For more details see, for example:
>
> www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ComputerScience/ProgrammingLanguageTheory/?view=usa&ci=9780199601424
>
> (to be published in April)
>
> or
>
> http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199601424.do
>
> (already available).
>
> or the usual sites.
>
> Michael Metcalf, John Reid, Malcolm Cohen,

On Mar 25, 4:35=A0am, m_b_metcalf <michaelmetc...@compuserve.com> wrote:
> Announcing "Modern Fortran Explained", Metcalf, Reid & Cohen (OUP,
> April 2011).
>
> Fortran remains one of the principal programming languages used in
> high-performance
> scientific, numerical, and engineering computing. A series of
> significant revisions
> to the standard versions of the language have progressively enhanced
> its capabilities, and the latest standard =96 Fortran 2008 =96 includes
> many modern
> features, such as object orientation, coarrays for parallel
> programming,
> interoperability with C

Just what I need for my upcoming project interfacing Fortran with C!

> "Modern Fortran Explained" (MFE) expands on its predecessor, "Fortran
> 95/2003
> Explained" (MRC).

And to think, I was just about to order 95/2003.

.... changing the delay in my phase-locked-loop!

;-)


agt
--
Freedom - no pane, all gaiGN!

Code Art Now
http://codeartnow.com
Email: a...@codeartnow.com

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 01:35:29 -0700 (PDT), m_b_metcalf
<michaelmetcalf@compuserve.com> wrote:

>For more details see, for example:
>
>www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ComputerScience/ProgrammingLanguageTheory/?view=usa&ci=9780199601424
>
>(to be published in April)
>
>or
>
>http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199601424.do
>
>(already available).
>
>or the usual sites.
>
>Michael Metcalf, John Reid, Malcolm Cohen,


I must be blind or too tired at this moment, for it looks to me that
the two are identical, "Modern fortran...", 4th edition. How can one
already be available, and one yet in print?

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 00:59:50 +0100, Luka Djigas <i_dont_have@mail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 01:35:29 -0700 (PDT), m_b_metcalf
><michaelmetcalf@compuserve.com> wrote:
>
>>For more details see, for example:
>>
>>www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ComputerScience/ProgrammingLanguageTheory/?view=usa&ci=9780199601424
>>
>>(to be published in April)
>>
>>or
>>
>>http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199601424.do
>>
>>(already available).
>>
>>or the usual sites.
>>
>>Michael Metcalf, John Reid, Malcolm Cohen,
>
>
>I must be blind or too tired at this moment, for it looks to me that
>the two are identical, "Modern fortran...", 4th edition. How can one
>already be available, and one yet in print?

But, (it shouldn't be forgotten, although it almost was), just want to
say I'm so glad the authors are investing so much effort, to follow up
with the times and produce quality reference books for our favourite
language.
The 95/03 edition was a very pleasurable text to read, and I found
some advanced concepts explained in a very clear way.

On 3/25/2011 1:35 AM, m_b_metcalf wrote:
> Announcing "Modern Fortran Explained", Metcalf, Reid&  Cohen (OUP,
> April 2011).
>
> Fortran remains one of the principal programming languages used in
> high-performance
> scientific, numerical, and engineering computing. A series of
> significant revisions
> to the standard versions of the language have progressively enhanced
> its capabilities, and the latest standard � Fortran 2008 � includes
> many modern
> features, such as object orientation, coarrays for parallel
> programming,
> interoperability with C, and various other enhancements.
>
> "Modern Fortran Explained" (MFE) expands on its predecessor, "Fortran
> 95/2003
> Explained" (MRC). The opening chapters, completely revised, contain a
> complete description of Fortran 95, extended by the allocatable
> array features of Fortran 2003. There follow chapters describing the
> other
> additional features of Fortran 2003, then new chapters on coarrays and
> the many
> other enhancements of Fortran 2008. The distinction between the three
> language
> levels is kept clear throughout.
>
> Written by leading experts in the field, two of whom have actively
> contributed to Fortran 2008, this is a complete and authoritative
> description of
> Fortran in its modern form. It is intended for new and existing users
> of the
> language, and for all those involved in scientific and numerical
> computing.
> It is suitable as a textbook for teaching and, with its extensive
> Appendices
> and Index, as a handy reference for practitioners.
>
> For more details see, for example:
>
> www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ComputerScience/ProgrammingLanguageTheory/?view=usa&ci=9780199601424
>
> (to be published in April)
>
> or
>
> http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199601424.do
>
> (already available).
>
> or the usual sites.
>
> Michael Metcalf, John Reid, Malcolm Cohen,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFJVu4N515Q
-- 
Uno

In message 
<4ef7dd17-eb05-457e-aba5-7d0330e519aa@r3g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, 
m_b_metcalf <michaelmetcalf@compuserve.com> writes
>Announcing "Modern Fortran Explained", Metcalf, Reid & Cohen (OUP,
>April 2011).

I'm just wondering, since the numerical sequence has been abandoned, 
what the next book in the series is going to be called, after:
90
95
95/2003
Modern

Perhaps that should be a question in an IQ test :-)

-- 
Clive Page

Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:

> In message 
> <4ef7dd17-eb05-457e-aba5-7d0330e519aa@r3g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, 
> m_b_metcalf <michaelmetcalf@compuserve.com> writes
> >Announcing "Modern Fortran Explained", Metcalf, Reid & Cohen (OUP,
> >April 2011).
> 
> I'm just wondering, since the numerical sequence has been abandoned, 
> what the next book in the series is going to be called, after:
> 90
> 95
> 95/2003
> Modern
> 
> Perhaps that should be a question in an IQ test :-)

Post-modern? :-)

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain

On Mar 27, 6:08=A0pm, nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:
> Clive Page <use...@page2.eu> wrote:
> > In message
> > <4ef7dd17-eb05-457e-aba5-7d0330e51...@r3g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> > m_b_metcalf <michaelmetc...@compuserve.com> writes
> > >Announcing "Modern Fortran Explained", Metcalf, Reid & Cohen (OUP,
> > >April 2011).
>
> > I'm just wondering, since the numerical sequence has been abandoned,
> > what the next book in the series is going to be called, after:
> > 90
> > 95
> > 95/2003
> > Modern
>
> > Perhaps that should be a question in an IQ test :-)
>
> Post-modern? :-)

"Post-modern" is a term normally conjugated with art in the sense of
rejecting "modernist" approaches to art. Although we aspire to make
our code works of art, I don't think we can identify a period that
distinguishes itself as promoting a departure from classical
principles in computer programming that could be described as
"modernist". Hence "post-modernist" would have no relevance, here.

I recently gave up on expressly indicating 90,95,2003,2008 vis a vis
"antiquated" Fortran (i.e., 77 and earlier), substituting the term
"modern" instead. Perhaps the authors could consider "Contemporary
Fortran Explained" and include the year of publication? Then they need
not scratch their heads about a new title every time they want to
upgrade the book.:-)

agt
--
Freedom - no pane, all gaiGN!

Code Art Now
http://codeartnow.com
Email: agt@codeartnow.com

On 3/27/2011 5:08 PM, Richard Maine wrote:
> Clive Page<usenet@page2.eu>  wrote:
>
>> In message
>> <4ef7dd17-eb05-457e-aba5-7d0330e519aa@r3g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>> m_b_metcalf<michaelmetcalf@compuserve.com>  writes
>>> Announcing "Modern Fortran Explained", Metcalf, Reid&  Cohen (OUP,
>>> April 2011).
>>
>> I'm just wondering, since the numerical sequence has been abandoned,
>> what the next book in the series is going to be called, after:
>> 90
>> 95
>> 95/2003
>> Modern
>>
>> Perhaps that should be a question in an IQ test :-)
>
> Post-modern? :-)

I suppose we'll now have to introduce Fortran "Classic"... :)

--

dpb <none@non.net> wrote:

> I suppose we'll now have to introduce Fortran "Classic"... :)

That one's already been done. Or anyway, it was named something like
that. I recall reading here about something, might even have been a
book, where the author defined and advocated something with a name at
least simillar to that. I can't find it with a (very) quick google
search. I recall finding myself most unimpressed with it, but I'll not
go more into that here.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain

Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
(snip) 
> I'm just wondering, since the numerical sequence has been abandoned, 
> what the next book in the series is going to be called, after:
> 90
> 95
> 95/2003
> Modern

I still have my Fortran 8X explained.

As someone else noted, postmodern should be next.

Fortran 2013 is probably about as much like Fortran I as
post-modern art is to renaisance art.

-- glen

On 3/28/2011 5:43 PM, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> Clive Page<usenet@page2.eu>  wrote:
> (snip)
>> I'm just wondering, since the numerical sequence has been abandoned,
>> what the next book in the series is going to be called, after:
>> 90
>> 95
>> 95/2003
>> Modern
>
> I still have my Fortran 8X explained.
>
> As someone else noted, postmodern should be next.
>
> Fortran 2013 is probably about as much like Fortran I as
> post-modern art is to renaisance art.
>
> -- glen

And after postmodern, postpostmodern.

On Mar 25, 3:29=A0pm, Daniel Carrera <dan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the announcement.
>
> I have been borrowing a copy of the first edition of this book, and I
> like it very much. I think I'll get a copy of the new edition.
>
> Daniel.
>
> On 03/25/2011 09:35 AM, m_b_metcalf wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Daniel, thanks for that. Please note there might be some confusion
about the numbering of the various editions. According to our
publisher, the main ones are:

1, 1987, 262 pp., "Fortran 8x Explained"

3, 1990, 294 pp., "Fortran 90 Explained"

4, 1996, 345 pp., "Fortran 90/95 Explained"

6, 2004, 416 pp., "Fortran 95/2003 Explained"

7, 2011, 488 pp., "Modern Fortran Explained"

Regards,

Mike Metcalf

On 03/28/2011 06:43 AM, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> I still have my Fortran 8X explained.
>
> As someone else noted, postmodern should be next.
>
> Fortran 2013 is probably about as much like Fortran I as
> post-modern art is to renaisance art.

Do we know ahead of time that there will be a Fortran 2013? I'm curious.

Richard Maine wrote:
> dpb <none@non.net> wrote:
> 
>> I suppose we'll now have to introduce Fortran "Classic"... :)
> 
> That one's already been done. Or anyway, it was named something like
> that. I recall reading here about something, might even have been a
> book, 

Yes there was. I saw it on the shelf in Blackwells in Oxford.

> where the author defined and advocated something with a name at
> least simillar to that. I can't find it with a (very) quick google
> search. I recall finding myself most unimpressed with it, but I'll not
> go more into that here.
> 

I remains the only Fortran book I haven't snapped up after flicking through,

Ian

On Mar 27, 9:05=A0pm, nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:
> dpb <n...@non.net> wrote:
> > I suppose we'll now have to introduce Fortran "Classic"... :)
>
> That one's already been done. Or anyway, it was named something like
> that. I recall reading here about something, might even have been a
> book, where the author defined and advocated something with a name at
> least simillar to that. I can't find it with a (very) quick google
> search. I recall finding myself most unimpressed with it, but I'll not
> go more into that here.

The book is

Classical Fortran: Programming for Engineering and Scientific
Applications, Second Edition (2009)
by Michael Kupferschmid .

I have purchased the Fortran 2003 edition of the book and am pleased
that there is a new edition.

If I were teaching programming to someone interested in physics or
engineering, I might start with a Python (with the SciPy package) or
Octave . The student's first programs won't need variable declarations
or to be compiled. I think a book is needed that shows how Fortran
2003 fits in with the other, initially more convenient, tools a
scientist or engineer would use. One such book is "Python Scripting
for Computational Science" (2008) by Hans Petter Langtangen, but the
Fortran code in that book uses the F77 style, because that's what the
Python wrapping tools in the book handle. (The fwrap project
http://fwrap.sourceforge.net/ aims to wrap general Fortran 95 code.)
The book also assumes knowledge of F77 rather than teaching it.

On Mar 28, 4:35=A0am, Daniel Carrera <dan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/28/2011 06:43 AM, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>
> > I still have my Fortran 8X explained.
>
> > As someone else noted, postmodern should be next.
>
> > Fortran 2013 is probably about as much like Fortran I as
> > post-modern art is to renaisance art.
>
> Do we know ahead of time that there will be a Fortran 2013? I'm curious.

On the other hand, perhaps we could classify the emergence of the OOP
paradigm as the period of modernism. Then recent approaches to marry
OOP with the classical ideals of procedural programming might be
considered post-modernist?

agt
--
Freedom - no pane, all gaiGN!

Code Art Now
http://codeartnow.com
Email: agt@codeartnow.com

On 03/28/2011 04:18 PM, Beliavsky wrote:
> If I were teaching programming to someone interested in physics or
> engineering, I might start with a Python (with the SciPy package) or
> Octave.

I'm not a fan of Python's syntax, or SciPy's separation of matrices vs 
narrays. So I'd vote for Octave.

I wish there was an Octave-like interactive program with a slightly more 
Fortran-like syntax.


> One such book is "Python Scripting
> for Computational Science" (2008) by Hans Petter Langtangen, but the
> Fortran code in that book uses the F77 style, because that's what the
> Python wrapping tools in the book handle...


I've been thinking lately about how I would design a course on 
scientific computing that taught Fortran. My first goal would be to 
force everyone to use strictly modern Fortran, and I think you can do 
that with only three simple rules:

1. The program must compile without warnings with gfortran -std=f2008

2. *ALL* procedures must be in modules.

3. Every module must start with "implicit none".


These should be easy for students to keep in mind for the teacher to 
check, and they prohibit most of the things students might do wrong 
regarding Fortran dialect.


Daniel.

On Mar 26, 1:59=A0am, Luka Djigas <i_dont_h...@mail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 01:35:29 -0700 (PDT), m_b_metcalf
>
>
>
>
>
> <michaelmetc...@compuserve.com> wrote:
> >For more details see, for example:
>
> >www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ComputerScience/ProgrammingLan...
>
> >(to be published in April)
>
> >or
>
> >http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199601424.do
>
> >(already available).
>
> >or the usual sites.
>
> >Michael Metcalf, John Reid, Malcolm Cohen,
>
> I must be blind or too tired at this moment, for it looks to me that
> the two are identical, "Modern fortran...", 4th edition. How can one
> already be available, and one yet in print?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Sorry not to have answered before. The point is that a book is printed
on one side of the Atlantic and therefore becomes available in the
warehouse (=3D published) on that side of the Atlantic first. Only when
a consignment arrives on the other side is it published there too. The
delay is less than a month.

I note that Google mangles the US link I provided. A shorter one is:

http://www.us.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ComputerScience/?view=3Dus=
a

and then search on the title.

Regards,

Mike Metcalf

Op 28/03/2011 16:39, viper-2 schreef:
> On the other hand, perhaps we could classify the emergence of the OOP
> paradigm as the period of modernism. Then recent approaches to marry
> OOP with the classical ideals of procedural programming might be
> considered post-modernist?

I like OOP for its convenience but saying that Fortran is modern (or 
post-modernist) because it supports OOP reduces it I think (can't find 
the right translation for the French word "r�ducteur").

Even if Fortran supports OOP, I like its procedural nature, and I'm 
curious about the mess some OOP programmers coming to Fortran can produce.

Adrien

On 28 mrt, 16:55, Daniel Carrera <dan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/28/2011 04:18 PM, Beliavsky wrote:
>
> > If I were teaching programming to someone interested in physics or
> > engineering, I might start with a Python (with the SciPy package) or
> > Octave.
>
> I'm not a fan of Python's syntax, or SciPy's separation of matrices vs
> narrays. So I'd vote for Octave.
>
> I wish there was an Octave-like interactive program with a slightly more
> Fortran-like syntax.
>
> > One such book is "Python Scripting
> > for Computational Science" (2008) by Hans Petter Langtangen, but the
> > Fortran code in that book uses the F77 style, because that's what the
> > Python wrapping tools in the book handle...
>
> I've been thinking lately about how I would design a course on
> scientific computing that taught Fortran. My first goal would be to
> force everyone to use strictly modern Fortran, and I think you can do
> that with only three simple rules:
>
> 1. The program must compile without warnings with gfortran -std=f2008
>
> 2. *ALL* procedures must be in modules.
>
> 3. Every module must start with "implicit none".
>
> These should be easy for students to keep in mind for the teacher to
> check, and they prohibit most of the things students might do wrong
> regarding Fortran dialect.
>
> Daniel.

There used to be the "F" subset of Fortran (based on Fortran 90 or 95)
that
enforced just such rules (Mike (co)authored a book on it). I have not
heard
anything about it for several years now ...

Regards,

Arjen

"Daniel Carrera" <daniel@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:imq7gp$u2k$1@dont-email.me...
> On 03/28/2011 04:18 PM, Beliavsky wrote:
>> If I were teaching programming to someone interested in physics or
>> engineering, I might start with a Python (with the SciPy package) or
>> Octave.
>
> I'm not a fan of Python's syntax, or SciPy's separation of matrices vs 
> narrays. So I'd vote for Octave.
>
> I wish there was an Octave-like interactive program with a slightly more 
> Fortran-like syntax.
>
>
>> One such book is "Python Scripting
>> for Computational Science" (2008) by Hans Petter Langtangen, but the
>> Fortran code in that book uses the F77 style, because that's what the
>> Python wrapping tools in the book handle...
>
>
> I've been thinking lately about how I would design a course on scientific 
> computing that taught Fortran. My first goal would be to force everyone 
> to use strictly modern Fortran, and I think you can do that with only 
> three simple rules:
>
> 1. The program must compile without warnings with gfortran -std=f2008
>
> 2. *ALL* procedures must be in modules.
>
> 3. Every module must start with "implicit none".
>


4.  The COMMON statement is forbidden.

-- 
Qolin

Email: my qname at domain dot com
Domain: qomputing 

On Mar 29, 9:06=A0am, Arjen Markus <arjen.markus...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There used to be the "F" subset of Fortran (based on Fortran 90 or 95)
> that
> enforced just such rules (Mike (co)authored a book on it). I have not
> heard
> anything about it for several years now ...

Walt Brainerd worked with Andy Vaught to create the std=3DF compiler
option for g95 , so F is available wherever g95 is. I have not heard
anything from the developer of g95 for several months now ...

On Mar 29, 10:07=A0pm, Beliavsky <beliav...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 9:06=A0am, Arjen Markus <arjen.markus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > There used to be the "F" subset of Fortran (based on Fortran 90 or 95)
> > that
> > enforced just such rules (Mike (co)authored a book on it). I have not
> > heard
> > anything about it for several years now ...
>
> Walt Brainerd worked with Andy Vaught to create the std=3DF compiler
> option for g95 , so F is available wherever g95 is. I have not heard
> anything from the developer of g95 for several months now ...

A summary of the difference between f95 and F is available here:

http://www.fortran.com/F/f90_not_f.html

Regards,

Mike Metcalf

On Mar 28, 6:04=A0pm, m_b_metcalf <michaelmetc...@compuserve.com> wrote:
> According to our  publisher, the main ones are:
> 1, 1987, 262 pp., "Fortran 8x Explained"
> 3, 1990, 294 pp., "Fortran 90 Explained"
> 4, 1996, 345 pp., "Fortran 90/95 Explained"
> 6, 2004, 416 pp., "Fortran 95/2003 Explained"
> 7, 2011, 488 pp., "Modern Fortran Explained"
> Regards,
> Mike Metcalf

I found that very interesting.
Since I have used Fortran I, Fortran II, Fortran 4/1/61 ("Fortran
III"), and Fortran IV while at IBM between 1960 and 1966, such surely
meriting the sequence 1,2,3,4), then used an M.S. Fortran which I
suspect was F66, than a better one of 1983 or so (very good F77, but
incomplete), and dabbled with M.S. Fortran 5 (buggy) and Lahey
(various tastes), I don't see how to get a Fortran Standards Committee
numbering sequence that reaches Fortran 8x by 1987. What IS,
precisely, the Fortran 8x referred to?

I tempted to start on "Archaic Fortran explained", possibly including
a paragraph on the optional COMEFROM statement...  =3D;o)>

On Mar 31, 8:16=A0am, Terence <tbwri...@cantv.net> wrote:
> On Mar 28, 6:04=A0pm, m_b_metcalf <michaelmetc...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>
> > According to our =A0publisher, the main ones are:
> > 1, 1987, 262 pp., "Fortran 8x Explained"
> > 3, 1990, 294 pp., "Fortran 90 Explained"
> > 4, 1996, 345 pp., "Fortran 90/95 Explained"
> > 6, 2004, 416 pp., "Fortran 95/2003 Explained"
> > 7, 2011, 488 pp., "Modern Fortran Explained"
> > Regards,
> > Mike Metcalf
>
> I found that very interesting.
> Since I have used Fortran I, Fortran II, Fortran 4/1/61 ("Fortran
> III"), and Fortran IV while at IBM between 1960 and 1966, such surely
> meriting the sequence 1,2,3,4), then used an M.S. Fortran which I
> suspect was F66, than a better one of 1983 or so (very good F77, but
> incomplete), and dabbled with M.S. Fortran 5 (buggy) and Lahey
> (various tastes), I don't see how to get a Fortran Standards Committee
> numbering sequence that reaches Fortran 8x by 1987. What IS,
> precisely, the Fortran 8x referred to?
>

The edition numbering is of our books, not of the versions of Fortran
you refer to.

Fortran 8x was the working name for what became Fortran 90. In 1987
the draft standard was very contentious and we thought it merited a
book in its own right. The implied value of x slowly increased,
finally having to be represented in hex.

HTH,

Mike Metcalf