Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- From: Thomas Koenig <Thomas.Koenig@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 11:28:37 +0200 (CEST)
Brooks Moses <bmoses-nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Richard E Maine wrote:
>> Although I agree (and have regularly said) that the general rule is that
>> * formatting is for when you don't care about the details, this
>> particular case is not even a matter where the compiler might or might
>> not do what you want. In this case, the standard actually *REQUIRES*
>> the compiler to do what you don't want (even if some compilers have been
>> known to violate the standard). The reasons for that are historical.
>If you don't mind the telling, I'd like to hear the historical reasons.
The first character in a printed line was interpreted as a (hardware)
carriage control character. ' ' meant a new line, '1' a new page,
'+' overprinting, and possibly a few others that I've forgotten.
The 'asa' utility on Unix systems is usually used to convert this to
something more Unixish.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- From: Ron Shepard
- Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- References:
- Fortran write(print) problem
- From: Wang Jun
- Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- From: Brooks Moses
- Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- From: Richard E Maine
- Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- From: Brooks Moses
- Fortran write(print) problem
- Prev by Date: Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- Next by Date: Re: NLEQ1 and open source Fortran
- Previous by thread: Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- Next by thread: Re: Fortran write(print) problem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|