Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!cmcl2!lanl!cochiti.lanl.gov!jlg
From: jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Fortran 90 status
Message-ID: <23943@lanl.gov>
Date: 17 May 91 15:38:37 GMT
References: <3246@travis.csd.harris.com> <1991May10.002337.22669@ariel.unm.edu> <23881@lanl.gov> <5807@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Sender: news@lanl.gov
Distribution: comp
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 16

In article <5807@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>, ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
|> In article <23881@lanl.gov>, jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
|> > 8) ASSIGN statements with FORMAT labels.
|> >    [...]In this case, it is clear that CHARACTER variables (and POINTERs
|> >    to such) are exact replacements semantically - just a different syntax.
|> [...]
|> The second is that CHARACTER variables are _not_ exact replacements,
|> although a smart Fortran compiler _could_ notice this special case.
|> [...]

I should have been more clear.  When I say that something is the same
semantically, I am claiming that the _meaning_ of a correct program is
the same.  Operationally, there may be differences of efficiency which
I am not referring to.

J. Giles