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