Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: Richard Maine <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:31:59 -0700
In article <11jp6i1cnaku3d2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Gary L. Scott" <garyscott@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Arjen Markus wrote:
> > But what happens with a loop like:
> >
> > read( s, *, err=1 ) ( v(i) ,i=7,100,3 )
> >
> > (By the way the final value of "i" with the Intel Fortran compiler
> > on Linux is 103)
>
> I would think that should be an error. 100 should be interpreted as a
> maximum range value that must not be exceeded. I've no idea of standard
> conformance though.
No. For the non-error case, the standard requires the value 103, just
like you would get out of a "regular" DO loop. Of course, for the error
case, as mentioned before, anything that the compiler does to i is ok,
since the standard says it is undefined.
.
- References:
- Does this string processing work for you?
- From: David Frank
- Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: Herman D . Knoble
- Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: David Frank
- Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: Arjen Markus
- Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: David Frank
- Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: Dan Nagle
- Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: David Frank
- Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: Arjen Markus
- Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- From: Gary L. Scott
- Does this string processing work for you?
- Prev by Date: Re: arth - function in Numerical Recipes (F90)
- Next by Date: Re: Intel Fortran license?
- Previous by thread: Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- Next by thread: Re: Does this string processing work for you?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|