Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!texbell!texsun!newstop!sun!chiba!khb From: khb@chiba.Sun.COM (chiba) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: EQUIVALENCE, COMPUTED GO TO in FORTRAN 88? Message-ID: <129176@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 13 Dec 89 08:00:54 GMT References: <143@suntc.UUCP> Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM Reply-To: khb@sun.UUCP (chiba) Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View Lines: 40 In article <143@suntc.UUCP> jh34607@suntc.UUCP (john howell) writes: >What is the status of > > 1) EQUIVALENCE > 2) COMPUTED GO TO > >constructions in future fortrans? The current (and all previous that I know of) draft of Fortran 8x (or other title :>) include these features. > >I recall hearing that these may be on the "not recommended use" list. Some of what EQUIVALENCE is used to accomplish can be done better with newer constructs. Computed goto can be replaced by the CASE construct. X3J3 did have a list of features which are standard conforming, but which may be deleted in about 20 years or so (the depreciated features). That list was removed because many found it objectionable. ANSI rules only specify that a 1 rev (aprox 10 years for fortran ... longer this time) warning be given ... so the list was not strictly speaking necessary. In Metcalf and Reid's Fortran 8x Explained they have good descriptions of what features are redundant and why. Just as I "purified" old '66 decks (changed holleriths to character, etc.) over a period of years, I intend to slowly fix all the codes I touch to use the newer features where they are better. In 10-30 years some of the oldest redundant features will almost certainly start to disappear ... software may last forever ... but it can be upgraded in a sensible fashion. Keith H. Bierman |*My thoughts are my own. !! kbierman@sun.com It's Not My Fault | MTS --Only my work belongs to Sun* I Voted for Bill & | Advanced Languages/Floating Point Group Opus | "When the going gets Weird .. the Weird turn PRO"