Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!gatech!gitpyr!loligo!mccalpin
From: mccalpin@loligo.uucp (John McCalpin)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: FORTRAN porting question
Message-ID: <7846@pyr.gatech.EDU>
Date: 4 Apr 89 20:32:58 GMT
References: <1868@quanta.eng.ohio-state.edu> <330@uncw.UUCP>
Sender: news@pyr.gatech.EDU
Reply-To: mccalpin@loligo.UUCP (John McCalpin)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute
Lines: 26

In article <1868@quanta.eng.ohio-state.edu> kaul@icarus.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rich Kaul) writes:
>...  The code I have to port has lots of loops like:
>	IF (I.EQ.J) GOTO 1000
>	...
>	DO 1000 K=1,77
>	...
>   1000 CONTINUE
>My question is, how should this behave?  ...

Although this particular horse has been beaten to death, I just thought I
should throw in a loop that occurred frequently in a code that I got to
port once.

	if ( count.ge.1 ) goto 1000
	do 1000 i=1,count
	    do stuff here
 1000	continue

This was apparently an attempt to enable Fortran-77 style DO loops 
with a Fortran-66 compiler.  Of course, in the modern world, it just
manages to combine a redundant loop bounds check with an illegal jump.
I'm sure that the programmer thought it was clever, though....
----------------------   John D. McCalpin   ------------------------
Dept of Oceanography & Supercomputer Computations Research Institute
mccalpin@masig1.ocean.fsu.edu		mccalpin@nu.cs.fsu.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------