Re: Need interpretation
- From: Ron Shepard <ron-shepard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 09:29:15 -0600
In article <1h7zx32.1f69sigg5z0d0N%nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Maine) wrote:
> Ron Shepard <ron-shepard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [code elided]
>
> > read(10,cmft,iostat=ierr) i ! this should generate an eof error
>
> Please note that eof is *NOT* an error.
Yes, that is right. My mistake. I guess "error" should be changed
to "condition" in the comment statement. I almost always use the
variable "ierr" for iostat return codes, and that is a little
misleading.
[...]
> I haven't experimented with this in recent years myself, but I've been
> told that most compilers get it right these days. I can't vouch for how
> accurate that is.
At one time, so many compilers got this wrong that I had a library
subroutine that would determine what each compiler did at runtime,
it set a saved variable, and later used that variable to determine
how many backspaces were required in order to append to an existing
file, overwrite the last record, etc.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
.
- References:
- Need interpretation
- From: Jerry DeLisle
- Re: Need interpretation
- From: Ron Shepard
- Re: Need interpretation
- From: Richard Maine
- Need interpretation
- Prev by Date: Re: Writing ANSI escape sequences from FORTRAN under Win2K using Visual Fortran
- Next by Date: Re: Need interpretation
- Previous by thread: Re: Need interpretation
- Next by thread: Re: Need interpretation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|