Re: The joy of FORTRAN

186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:

On 10/18/24 1:41 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On 18 Oct 2024 04:35:09 GMT, rbowman wrote:
 

Our source tree still has vestiges of Fortran that go back more than 20
years and are strictly f77.
 
recnum = 1 read(adrich,15,rec=recnum) totrec
15   format(i10)
 
100 if(recnum.gt.totrec) goto 500
read(adrich,105,rec=recnum+1) ch
105 format(1a1)

 
You know that Fortran 77 introduced if-then and do-while, right?
 

f-strings are the best thing that happened to Python recently.

 
I still prefer printf-style formatting. It works across so many different
languages ... even Lisp.

 
  There are many attempts to do fine-format printing
  "easy". NONE really do it perfectly. Dunno if there
  *is* a 'perfect'.
 
  Printf is "ok". FORTRAN "format" is kinda OK. Python
  kinda borrows from both FORTRAN and 'C' as does
  Free Pascal.
 
  Of course TODAY, fine-formatting generally means
  something in a GUI, not for a terminal or line
  printer. I've got an old OKI pin-printer ... very
  noisy, but that's what "format" and such were for.
  Makes for nice tabular reports and paychecks.
 
  Oh, try Amazon or something and look at the PRICE
  of OKI pin printers these days !!! Kinda miss
  them ... the buzz sounded like you were DOING
  something  :-)
 

PL/I’s PUT LIST does a pretty good job (except for spacing between fields),
but of course it knows the definitions of the data it’s printing.- number
of digits and decimal places for numeric, foe example. I find PUT LIST good
enough for most cases, and only fall back on PUT EDIT (with format) on
occasion.

--
Pete