Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!ctrsol!cica!iuvax!rutgers!bellcore!att!cbnews!r4
From: r4@cbnews.ATT.COM (richard.r.grady..jr)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Standard conformance
Message-ID: <9568@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 15 Sep 89 15:50:54 GMT
References: <1301@tukki.jyu.fi>
Reply-To: r4@cbnews.ATT.COM (richard.r.grady..jr,54354,mv,3a018,508 960 6182)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 31

In article <1301@tukki.jyu.fi> markku@jytko.jyu.fi (Markku Sakkinen) SAKKINEN@FINJYU.bitnet (alternative) writes:
> [ Markku complains that two Fortran-77 compilers (Digital's VAX/VMS
>   and Sun) do not complain about the illegal GOTO in the following
>  code.]
> 
>       INTEGER I, J
>       IF (I .LT. 100000) GOTO 2
>       DO 9 I = 1, 10
> 2     J = I * I
>       WRITE (6, 100) I, J
> 9     CONTINUE
> 100   FORMAT (2I12)
>       END
> 
> It contains a GOTO into a DO loop, which is illegal in Fortran-77.

I tried this code with the f77 (Fortran-77) compiler on my Unix
system (SYS V).  It compiled without complaint.
It also executed without complaint.  There was only one line of output, and
the result depended upon whether the output was directed to the standard
output (terminal) or to a file:

        Output file        I       J

        <standard output>  0    2135329856
        fort.out           0   -2147343360
        2fort.out          0    1593912976
        zzzzqqqqzqzq       0   -2146113776

--
Dick Grady              r_r_grady@att.com          ...!att!mvuxd!r4