Re: Need Help: compiling old Fortran program

Wade Ward wrote:

"James Giles" <jamesgiles@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
...
*SOME* programmers evidently used it.

:-)

Do, I understand correctly that
program giles1
integer :: i
do, i=1,10
write(*,*) i
end do
end program giles1
is legal fortran?

Yes. But I would write it:

program notgiles1
implicit none
integer :: i
do, i=1,10
write(*,*) i
end do
end program giles1

It's ugly as all get out.

Depends on the eyes of the beholder.

Yeah, I am a "SOME" programmer who has used the comma for many years,
for the reasons James explains. IMO, anything that can help find my
typos at compile time is a Good Thing! Even if it appears, to some
others, to be slightly 'ugly' or redundant. IMPLICIT NONE and explicit
interfaces fall in the same category.

Using the comma is still habitual for me. Even though with F90 free
source form, where blanks are signficant, the reasons for it are no
longer unnecessary.

W.
.