Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!quintus!ok
From: ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: FORTRAN 8x parser/lexer .NE. compil
Message-ID: <568@quintus.UUCP>
Date: 25 Oct 88 06:38:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: quintus.568
References: <656@convex.UUCP> <44400026@hcx2> <909@mace.cc.purdue.edu>
Sender: news@quintus.UUCP
Reply-To: ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Inc.
Lines: 17

In article <909@mace.cc.purdue.edu> tsh@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Greg Kamer) writes:
>I've written about this one before. MODULE is much more useful than
>INCLUDE if you are writing your code on a front-end machine and
>submitting it to a remote host. For such a setup, INCLUDE's
>have to be done with a front-end preprocessor before submitting the
>mainframe. With MODULE's you can simply prepend all of your MODULE's
>to the front of the code and send it off.

Could you clarify this a bit?  It sounds as though you are saying that
all the MODULEs used in a program have to be part of the same compilation
source on the mainframe; that you can't have some MODULEs sitting there
that you just use.  Is that so?

If it isn't so, how is having a module already sitting on the mainframe
and having the compiler use it any easier than having an INCLUDE file
already sitting on the mainframe and having the compiler on the mainframe
include it?  (Remember COBOL's "COPY" statement, anyone?  It can be done.)