Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!sun!guy
From: guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.lang.f77
Subject: Re: Translator from Rat4 to F77?
Message-ID: <2281@sun.uucp>
Date: Fri, 7-Jun-85 02:44:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2281
Posted: Fri Jun  7 02:44:21 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Jun-85 01:53:45 EDT
References: <453@ho95b.UUCP> <26610@lanl.ARPA> <2850003@acf4.UUCP> <875@sdcsla.UUCP> <361@moncol.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 21

> >and handles free-format input and some other preprocessor stuff.
> >The output is vanilla fortran 77, assuming that the input wasn't fortran-66
> >dependent (e.g. one-trip do-loops, etc.).
> 
> Hmmm... Has Ratfor been improved in the last few years? The Ratfor which
> came with our v7 system produces FORTRAN 66 as its output, not f77.
> 
> This means that the resulting program is often a maze of GOTO's.

F66 is pretty much a proper subset of F77; that's the sense in which Rat4
produces F77.  It produces code that should be compilable under either
compiler, assuming that the "plain FORTRAN" part of the code is compilable
under either compiler.

Actually, one-trip do-loops weren't a part of F66; the F66 spec didn't say
what happened if the index would move away from the terminating value.  A
number of compilers took advantage of this and implemented one-trip loops.
F77 plugged that hole, although some manufacturer complained about it;
fortunately, nobody listened to them.

	Guy Harris