Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uflorida!haven!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!h.cc.purdue.edu!s.cc.purdue.edu!ags
From: ags@s.cc.purdue.edu (Dave Seaman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Fortran versus C for numerical analysis
Summary: Correction of previous post
Message-ID: <3536@s.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 2 Sep 88 20:18:43 GMT
References: <893@amelia.nas.nasa.gov> <3064@lanl.gov> <338@quintus.UUCP> <3534@s.cc.purdue.edu>
Reply-To: ags@s.cc.purdue.edu.UUCP (Dave Seaman)
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 19

In article <3534@s.cc.purdue.edu> I write:
>	1. Evaluate C(X) and place the result in a temporary, t1.
>	2. Evaluate A(X) and place the result in a temporary, t2.
>	3. Evaluate B(X) and place the result in a temporary, t3.
>	4. Add t3 to t2 and place the result in t3.
>	5. Add t3 to t1 and store the result in Y.

I misspoke myself in steps 4 and 5.  I didn't mean to imply that Fortran
was free to ignore the parentheses entirely, only that the terms could be
evaluated in any order.  Because of the parentheses in the original
expression, steps 4 and 5 need to be changed to:

	4. Add t1 and t3 and place the result in t3.
	5. Add t3 and t2 and store the result in Y.


-- 
Dave Seaman	  					
ags@j.cc.purdue.edu