|>Yes, that's true. The transposition is mental.
|>In my experience, interfacing between languages - certainly for the
|>kind of fairly simple vector/matrix interfaces the typical fortranner
|>would use (the _subprograms_ aren't simple but the _interfaces_
|>tend to be) - is, to a very large extent,a matter of getting the
|>data structures to agree.

|I haven't used many PL/I compilers, but they all had "iSUB defining".
|I never used that feature myself, but you could describe it as exposing
|the linear subscript mapping at the source level.  The result is that
|you could have a direct and a transposed view of the _same_ array.
|I would have thought that made it fairly easy to interface PL/I to Fortran.
|PL/I had, back in the 70's when I met it, a great many data types that
|would not have mapped onto Fortran, but every Fortran variable _could_ be
|mapped into PL/I more or less directly (with the aid of iSUB defining for
|>=2-dimensional arrays).

|--
|"The complex-type shall be a simple-type."  ISO 10206:1991 (Extended Pascal)
|Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.*-*-*.com/ ~ok; RMIT Comp.Sci.