Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!iuvax!pur-ee!j.cc.purdue.edu!ags
From: ags@j.cc.purdue.edu.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: "Interesting" error interpretation by f77.
Message-ID: <5571@j.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: Tue, 29-Sep-87 12:04:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: j.5571
Posted: Tue Sep 29 12:04:52 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 2-Oct-87 03:42:27 EDT
References: <5117@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <2577@aw.sei.cmu.edu> <5307@j.cc.purdue.edu> <2619@aw.sei.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: ags@j.cc.purdue.edu.UUCP (Dave Seaman)
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 27
Keywords: FORTRAN parsing, error interpretation.

In article <2619@aw.sei.cmu.edu> firth@bd.sei.cmu.edu.UUCP writes:
  (An excellent critique of the error messages in f77)

I agree that all of your suggestions represent improvements in the error
reporting.  I anticipated at least one of your points when I suggested
identifying the statement as an assignment statement.  However, I would
like to point out two things:

	1.  Any experienced FORTRAN programmer should be able to
	    decipher the f77 error messages without difficulty, as
	    has already been demonstrated on the net.

	2.  The main problem with f77 is not the poor error messages,
	    but the poor performance.

>As a last point: compilers that do all the above exist, and exist in
>profusion.  After using some of them, you might come to hold my view,
>that Unix is cursed with too much amateur software. (Or you might not;
>tastes vary)

I have used many FORTRAN compilers, but f77 is not one of them (except for
one or two trivial test runs when I was curious to find out what it would
do).  I use Unix (which I think is an excellent operating system for most
of my work), and I use FORTRAN, but I do not use FORTRAN on Unix.
-- 
Dave Seaman	  					
ags@j.cc.purdue.edu