Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!snorkelwacker!usc!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ogicse!milton!hardy!djo7613
From: djo7613@hardy.u.washington.edu (Dick O'Connor)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Fortran 77 Style Guide (long, REPOST)
Message-ID: <7426@milton.u.washington.edu>
Date: 12 Sep 90 20:09:46 GMT
Sender: news@milton.u.washington.edu
Reply-To: djo7613@hardy.acs.washington.edu (Dick O'Connor)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Lines: 16

In article <1990Sep11.191119.22682@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu> mac@harris.cis.ksu.edu (Myron A. Calhoun) writes:
>...
>Perhaps a stronger argument for "one I/O statement, one FORMAT" is the
>modern idea that code modules should be readable in one forward top-to-
>bottom pass.  Re-used FORMAT statements require flipping back and forth
>through the code and thus violate the "one pass top-to-bottom" convention.
>But duplicating the (almost always a) few FORMAT statements follows this
>convention.

What's the effect on executable size and execution time if every WRITE is
followed by a FORMAT, with all but the first one commented out?  This
is to avoid all that flipping back and forth, of course.

Curious...
"Moby" Dick O'Connor                         djo7613@u.washington.edu 
Washington Department of Fisheries           *I brake for salmonids*