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!