Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!unixhub!slacvm!kencb
From: KENCB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Is this kosher?
Message-ID: <91035.130727KENCB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: 4 Feb 91 21:07:27 GMT
References: <91030.132436KENCB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
 <9102041020.AA00951@LL.MIT.EDU>
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Lines: 30

In article <9102041020.AA00951@LL.MIT.EDU>, preston@LL.MIT.EDU (Steven Preston)
says:
>
>In article <91030.132436KENCB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
>KENCB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU writes:
>> However, MUCH to my SURPRISE, John's test program fragment compiled just
>> FINE under VAX Fortran!  Sheez!
>
>This is unfair to VAX Fortran.  If you would do a "help fortran" you
>might notice that there is are /standard and /f77 switches.  The
  [stuff deleted]
>Steve Preston

    No.  That's *not* the point.  (In fact I love the VAX Fortran
extensions, if the truth be known...)  The point is that the *documentation*
states that the jump into an IF-block is ILLEGAL, *not* that it is allowed
as a VAX extension.  Most (all?) VAX extensions are clearly labeled as
such by the different colored ink used in the manual, etc.  Can you point
me to a place in the manual (or help file) that states that jumps into
an IF-block are an allowed VAX extension to the standard??

                              -Ken
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Kenneth H. Fairfield         | Internet: Fairfield@Tpc.Slac.Stanford.Edu |
|  SLAC                         | DECnet:   45047::FAIRFIELD                |
|  P.O.Box 4349, Bin 98         | BITNET    Fairfield@SlacTpc               |
|  Stanford, CA   94309         | Phone:    (415) 926-2924                  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
   "These opinions are worth what you paid for 'em...
         ...and are they mine, not SLAC's, Stanford's, nor the DOE's..."