Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!teknowledge-vaxc!sri-unix!quintus!ok
From: ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Maximum Stack Size for a Subprog.?
Message-ID: <280@quintus.UUCP>
Date: 12 Aug 88 03:16:27 GMT
References: <47900003@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu> <50500062@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <271@quintus.UUCP> <3874@h.cc.purdue.edu>
Sender: news@quintus.UUCP
Reply-To: ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Inc.
Lines: 7

In article <3874@h.cc.purdue.edu> ags@h.cc.purdue.edu.UUCP (Dave Seaman) writes:
>In article <271@quintus.UUCP> ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
>>Trivia point:  in Fortran 66 this applied to COMMON blocks as well.
>
>Why the past tense?  It is still true in Fortran 77 that ...

To be perfectly honest, I wasn't sure about Fortran 77, so I limited myself
to an historical statement about F66.