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.