blank in assignment Fortran IV
in [Fortran]
|
From: nmm1 on 4 Nov 2009 05:44 In article <hcrjfn$el9$1(a)naig.caltech.edu>, glen herrmannsfeldt <gah(a)ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > >>>In Fortran I (not that I ever programmed in it) function names >>>were required to end in F. Functions returning a fixed point >>>value were required to start with X. (XRANF was not a function >>>included in the Fortran I library, though.) > >> According to the documentation I have seen, user-written functions >> didn't come in until Fortran II - it wasn't that they were required >> to end in 'F', so much as the built-in ones did. > >Depends on your definition of user-written. User-written in Fortran. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
From: glen herrmannsfeldt on 4 Nov 2009 06:04 nmm1(a)cam.ac.uk wrote: >>> According to the documentation I have seen, user-written functions >>> didn't come in until Fortran II - it wasn't that they were required >>> to end in 'F', so much as the built-in ones did. (then I wrote) >>Depends on your definition of user-written. > User-written in Fortran. Yes, not until Fortran II. Though random number generators for many years were written in assembly. Still my favorite are those for OS/360 which can be declared either REAL or INTEGER and return the appropriate value. -- glen
From: nmm1 on 4 Nov 2009 06:08 In article <hcrn34$g1g$1(a)naig.caltech.edu>, glen herrmannsfeldt <gah(a)ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >nmm1(a)cam.ac.uk wrote: > >>>> According to the documentation I have seen, user-written functions >>>> didn't come in until Fortran II - it wasn't that they were required >>>> to end in 'F', so much as the built-in ones did. >(then I wrote) > >>>Depends on your definition of user-written. > >> User-written in Fortran. > >Yes, not until Fortran II. > >Though random number generators for many years were written in assembly. > >Still my favorite are those for OS/360 which can be declared >either REAL or INTEGER and return the appropriate value. You could do that for DOUBLE PRECISION and COMPLEX as well :-) Regards, Nick Maclaren.
From: Gordon Sande on 4 Nov 2009 08:29 On 2009-11-04 05:16:07 -0400, nmm1(a)cam.ac.uk said: > In article <hcreo0$bth$1(a)naig.caltech.edu>, > glen herrmannsfeldt <gah(a)ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >> >> In Fortran I (not that I ever programmed in it) function names >> were required to end in F. Functions returning a fixed point >> value were required to start with X. (XRANF was not a function >> included in the Fortran I library, though.) > > According to the documentation I have seen, user-written functions > didn't come in until Fortran II - it wasn't that they were required > to end in 'F', so much as the built-in ones did. The "F" at the end indicated that they had a single floating point arguement that was passed in the accumulator. So SINF was one supplied by the system with SIN in the library for the loader to find. User functions rarely used this scheme although somthing like RANF would be possible. In practice they had to be written in the assembley lanuage for this to work. Non-"F" functions used an argument list as did subroutines. Users who thought the trailing "F" was good style in Fortran had obscure errors until they learned the naming rule. > But a spurious blank could simply be accidental (the word 'error' > isn't right, as it is perfectly correct) - without seeing the rest > of the program, there's no way to tell. > > > > Regards, > Nick Maclaren.
From: Alexandros Droseltis on 4 Nov 2009 11:49
Thank you all for your answer. The problem is that there is not a function XRANF(-1) and the only thing that would make sense in the given context would be that HX=HINF+HM*X RANF(-1) would mean X=RANF(-1) HX=HINF+HM*X that is, RANF(-1) is assigned to X and then HX is computed. Could this be possible in Fortran IV? Best Regards Alexandros |