Re: Is FORTRAN a dying language? (not a troll)
From: Steven G. Kargl (kargl_at_troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Date: 10 May 2004 21:32:17 GMT
In article <email@example.com>,
"firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com:7501> writes:
> It has rejected code that I had mistakenly thought was legal -- for example
> print "(i)",1
> The "(i)" format is not legal, but I think "(i0)" or (for example) "(i4)"
> is. LF95 does warn against "(i)" with
> the -f95 (strict F95) option, but G95 does not create an executable, which
> really gets my attention :).
I just read the section of the proposed standard that covers this.
A correct integer edit descriptor is of the form Iw[.m] where w is the
field width. w may be 0 for output and it cannot be 0 for input;
otherwise, w is a positive integer. It appears that some compilers
interpret '(I)' as '(I0)'. BTW, I0 tells the compiler to choose a
suitable width for output.