From ljm@slac.stanford.edu Tue May 9 09:04:52 1995 Received: from SERV04.SLAC.Stanford.EDU by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA25026 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Wed, 10 May 1995 02:05:20 +0200 Received: from [134.79.128.74] (MOZART.SLAC.Stanford.EDU) by SERV04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (PMDF V5.0-3 #6987) id <01HQB1U3N7Z40001AV@SERV04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>; Tue, 09 May 1995 17:04:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 09 May 1995 17:04:52 -0800 From: ljm@slac.stanford.edu (Leonard J. Moss) Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.800) Fortran 95 thoughts X-Sender: ljm@popserv To: vsnyder@math.jpl.nasa.gov, sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Message-Id: X-Envelope-To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 At 17:06 5/09/95, jwagener@amoco.com wrote, quoting Van Snyder: >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >----- >To discourage further the usage of GOTO, consider allowing EXIT to apply >to any construct, ... Unfortunately, this would break existing programs, e.g., DO I = 1, SIZE(K) IF (J == K(I)) THEN PRINT *, "Found ", J, " at item ", I, " of set, skipping remainder" EXIT ! the DO construct ENDIF CALL PROCESS( K(I) ) END DO One could, of course, introduce a BLOCK...END BLOCK construct and allow EXIT to apply to DO and BLOCK constructs only. -- Leonard J. Moss | My views don't necessarily Stanford Linear Accelerator Center | reflect those of SLAC, MS 97; P.O. Box 4349; Stanford, CA 94309 | Stanford or the DOE