Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!jerry
From: jerry@violet.berkeley.edu ( Jerry Berkman )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Using END= and ERR= in READs
Message-ID: <20692@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 22 Feb 89 02:53:24 GMT
References: <436@orange19.qtp.ufl.edu>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 26

In article <436@orange19.qtp.ufl.edu> bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) writes:

>I am writing code in which I want to trap I/O errors....  Logic tells me that
>an end-of-file condition should be handled by an ERR= iff no END= is present.

>The '77 standard tells me that "The set of input/output error
>conditions is processor dependent." That seems to give someone the
>leeway to *not* handle end-of-files with ERR= if no END= is present,
>and (of course) I have a case in which this occurs (SunOS 3.4 f77).

>Can anyone tell me if this "hole" was intentional, or an oversight?
>If it was intentional, what is the logic?  It seems rather inane to
>have to put in "END=8800, ERR=8800" into every READ statement.


There is no support in the standard for your "logic" that an
end-of-file condition should cause a branch via the "ERR=" label
if no "END=" is present.  Sections 12.6 and 12.7 discuss error
conditions and end-of-file conditions as distinct entities.
A processor which takes the "ERR=" branch for an end-of-file
condition would be non-standard.

	- Jerry Berkman
	  U.C. Berkeley Computing Services
	  jerry@violet.berkeley.edu