Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!vsnyder From: vsnyder@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Van Snyder) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: LABEL data type (Was: integer variable format address) Message-ID: <1991Mar9.005529.15699@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> Date: 9 Mar 91 00:55:29 GMT References: <31132@shamash.cdc.com> <91066.151240LJM@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> <214949.21497@timbuk.cray.com> Reply-To: vsnyder@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Van Snyder) Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA Lines: 25 In article <214949.21497@timbuk.cray.com> wws@raphael.cray.com (Walter Spector) writes: >... >Labels are an area where various Fortrans implementations are really wierd, >and Fortran-77 actually made matters worse (with alternate returns)!... Alternate returns are useful for exceptions: unlike a status flag, a lazy user can't ignore them. Fortran 90 HAD exception handling until the "Halifax Compromise", where lots of neat stuff ended up on the cutting room floor. >... Maybe there >should be a CDC-style BOOLEAN data type for all that masking and >shifting... Another victim of the Halifax Compromise. You should have written to X3J3 about three years ago. Fortran 90 has been through 3 public reviews, and those of us who agree with you have found Fortran 90 to be emasculated. However, the irregularity of the new language definitely preserves the "beloved Fortran tacked-on look." -- vsnyder@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov ames!elroy!jato!vsnyder vsnyder@jato.uucp