Re: Array Constructors
- From: "Steve Lionel" <steve.lionel@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 28 Feb 2007 10:42:03 -0800
On Feb 28, 12:52 pm, Jan Vorbrüggen <jvorbrueg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Do note that both I/O and DATA statement implied do loops go "way back".
So the difference isn't something new. People wouldn't yet have had a
chance to get annoyed enough at me to want to give me the chance to make
a fool of myself. Well, my parents were probably pretty frustrated, but
that's another matter. :-)
Hmmm...has that difference been pointed out, with all its consequences, in
the Fortran standard prior to F90?
More or less. Fortran 77 says, for data-implied-do:
"The appearance of an implied-DO-variable name in a DATA statement
does not affect the definition status of a variable of the same name
in the same program unit."
There is no similar text for I/O implied DO and the wording in F77 and
later indicates that it is processed like a normal DO, as noted by
others in this thread.
Steve
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: glen herrmannsfeldt
- Re: Array Constructors
- References:
- Array Constructors
- From: cjk32
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: Michael Metcalf
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: cjk32
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: *** Hendrickson
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: Richard Maine
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: Richard Maine
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: Jan Vorbrüggen
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: Richard Maine
- Re: Array Constructors
- From: Jan Vorbrüggen
- Array Constructors
- Prev by Date: Re: End of record marker - 32 vs. 64 bit
- Next by Date: Re: Array Constructors
- Previous by thread: Re: Array Constructors
- Next by thread: Re: Array Constructors
- Index(es):