Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!snorkelwacker!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca!buckland From: buckland@cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca (Tony Buckland) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Function calls in the middle of subroutine CALLs? -- Is it standard fortran 77 ???? Message-ID: <8768@ubc-cs.UUCP> Date: 19 Jul 90 20:27:15 GMT References: <6381@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1990Jul19.014856.13421@maytag.waterloo.edu> <5283@milton.u.washington.edu> Sender: news@cs.ubc.ca Reply-To: buckland@cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca (Tony Buckland) Organization: UBC Computing Centre, Vancouver, B.C., Canada Lines: 19 In article <5283@milton.u.washington.edu> seymour@milton.u.washington.edu (Richard Seymour) writes: >the old fortran 66 convention used to be left-to-right (unless overridden > by operator precedence). but they were talking expression evaluation. >DEC VMS F77 compiler very definitely warns you that optimization >can really mess up the left-to-right stuff. Even providing guiding >parentheses gets overridden by the optimizer. A pity. Many years ago when FORTRAN meant FORTRAN-IV, I wrote a package of functions to perform pieces of a task (string decomposition and manipulation, if you must know) as functions just so that I could achieve the compactness of R = ONE(A,B)+TWO(A,B,C)+THREE(A,C)+FOUR(A) Where R is a more-or-less useless result and the statement really means "do thing 1 to arguments A and B, then do thing 2 to A, B and C, then ..." where A, B, C were modified by the operations and order mattered very much. Nevermore; sigh.