Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rochester.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!rochester!ken From: ken@rochester.UUCP (and Vicki Herrieschopper) Newsgroups: net.wanted,net.lang.f77 Subject: Re: converting fortran-4 to fortran-77 Message-ID: <12679@rochester.UUCP> Date: Sun, 27-Oct-85 08:17:52 EST Article-I.D.: rocheste.12679 Posted: Sun Oct 27 08:17:52 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 29-Oct-85 01:20:13 EST References: <672@cal-unix> Reply-To: ken@rochester.UUCP (and Vicki Herrieschopper) Organization: Home for the terminally enabled Lines: 27 Xref: watmath net.wanted:7473 net.lang.f77:401 In article <672@cal-unix> cdsf@cal-uni.UUCP (Jack Kitchens) writes: >We have some fortran-4 source, currently on a PCompatible, that needs to >be converted to fortran-77 so we can compile it with the microsoft fortran >compiler. The big difference between the two seems to be the format of the >DATA and format statements. F77 is a superset of F4 with the exception of: 1. Hollerith data, which is sometimes supported for compatibility but discouraged. 2. Extended do loops (you don't to know about this). 3. Semantics of the do loop (now it may be executed zero times, whereas in F4 it executed at least once). Since you say the difference is in the DATA and format statements (I assume you tried compiling, but you didn't say what the F77 compiler objected to), I would first change the Hollerith data to quoted strings. If the compiler won't let you initialize non-character variables with string data, then you have to convert such constructs to use the character data type of F77, which is another story. Ken -- UUCP: ..!{allegra,decvax,seismo}!rochester!ken ARPA: ken@rochester.arpa USnail: Dept. of Comp. Sci., U. of Rochester, NY 14627. Voice: Ken!