Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!unixg.ubc.ca!cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca!buckland
From: buckland@cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca (Tony Buckland)
Subject: Re: Implied do loop in write (SUMMARY)
Message-ID: <1991Apr23.201123.3908@unixg.ubc.ca>
Sender: news@unixg.ubc.ca (Usenet News Maintenance)
Nntp-Posting-Host: cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca
Organization: Computing Services, University of British Columbia
References: <moshkovi.672431251@eurotunnel.ecn.purdue.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1991 20:11:23 GMT

In article <moshkovi.672431251@eurotunnel.ecn.purdue.edu> moshkovi@eurotunnel.ecn.purdue.edu (Gennady Moshkovich) writes:
>    do 1 i = 1,n
>       write(6,100) (matrix(i,j),j=1,m)
>   1 continue
>100 format(10i8)
>
>This way, however, is quite obvious, and it was implied in
>the original posting that the whanted one is the way to
>print _without knowing_ before values of m and n.

 So what's your problem with this method?  It *does* work
 without the values of m and n being known ahead of time.
 You're supposed to use the code as it was written, you
 know.  You're not supposed to substitute constants in
 the code where variables are shown.