On Jan 7, 2008 5:45 PM, SJS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> begin quoting Darren New as of Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 09:13:10PM -0800:
> > SJS wrote:
> > >Tracking down errors due to indentation errors is HARD.
> >
> > Um, no, not really. Neither COBOL nor FORTRAN had indentation rules
> > complex enough to make debugging difficult. Certain columns were
> > reserved for certain information, is all. You had certain columns for
> > labels, certain columns for "this is a continued line" or "this whole
> > line is a comment", and certain columns for numbering the cards (which
> > the compiler would ignore).
>
> > Seriously, who had problems with the fortran rule that code started in
> > column 8, and columns 1-6 were the label? Why is that worse than labels
> > in C that have to be followed by a colon?
I can't find the original original to reply to, so this
second-generation copy will have to do. Both my finger memory and my
FORTRAN IV reference manual (IBM 1966) tell me that labels (statement
numbers) are in columns 1-5, continuation symbol column 6, and code
starts in column 7.
By the way, the reason that columns 73-70 were ignored by the FORTRAN
compiler is that the original computer-attached card reader was made
for the purpose of loading 36-bit memory two words at a time, so it
had only 72 active read positions.
carl
--
carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
