Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site grkermi.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!vecpyr!lll-crg!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!grkermi!andrew
From: andrew@grkermi.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers)
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: Bizarre Code
Message-ID: <554@grkermi.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 16-Aug-85 09:11:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: grkermi.554
Posted: Fri Aug 16 09:11:44 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 20-Aug-85 03:56:09 EDT
References: <462@moncol.UUCP> <29712@lanl.ARPA>
Reply-To: andrew@grkermi.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers)
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 19

In article <29712@lanl.ARPA> lhl@a.UUCP (Lewis Lowe) writes:
>
>  The most bizarre code I ever had to program follows (in FORTRAN)
>
>  100 IF (IREQ.EQ.0) GO TO 100
>
>and was the accepted method, on a long-defunct system, of testing
>completion on an asynchronous I/O request.

When writing an overlaid program on HP-2100/RTE, you had to include a statement
like

	IF (2 .EQ. 4) CALL MAIN

because the linker wouldn't load the main unless there was a reference to it -
but if you actually *called* MAIN, your program would restart... therefore the
above.  (Optimization?  Constant folding?  What are those?)

AWR