<davidy@cogs.susx.ac.uk> wrote in message
b85q78$2f8p$1@soapbox.cs.bham.ac.uk">news:b85q78$2f8p$1@soapbox.cs.bham.ac.uk...
> > Irrelevant reminiscence: many years ago, I changed the value of 2 this
way.
> >
> > Ah, those were the days ;-).
>
> Were?? Well, I suppose there has been some progress - under present-day
> Solaris, using Sun's Fortran compiler, this program:
(snip)
> CONSTANT" followed by a segmentation fault!
>
> And in "Structured Fortran 77 Programming with Hewlett-Packard
> Computers" I read "Since a constant is meant to be a value not subject
> to change, it should be used [as an actual argument] in those instances
> where the subprogram's computations do not alter it."
>
> Maybe you didn't read the manual.
Manual? Manual? We don't need no steeenking manuals!
But I didn't realise the Fortran 77 manual was retrospective back to Fortan
IV
in 1972 :-). I'm afraid my memory for the documentation I didn't have more
than
thirty years ago (gosh, doesn't time fly?) is not complete. But I can still
remember
my bugs! :-).
Did I ever tell you about my (Fortran) draughts (checkers) program which
only had
one known bug? The bug was that it printed the following message:
"THERE IS A BUG"
The bug was caused by a missing GOTO before the WRITE statement that printed
the message.
However, in view of this bug, it wasn't a bug. In which case it was.
Jonathan
|