sjc@key.COM (Steve Correll) (12/20/89)
I think there's a missing constraint in F88 draft S8.112 section 9.4.1. It
correctly forbids "REC=" with list-directed formatting, but does not forbid
"REC=" with a namelist. Because namelist I/O, like list-directed I/O, can
span multiple records in a sequential fashion, it's unclear to me what it
would mean to specify a record number. Can anybody from X3J3 say whether this
is intentional or an oversight?
--
...{sun,pyramid}!pacbell!key!sjc Steve Correllbrainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd) (12/20/89)
In article <1326@key.COM>, sjc@key.COM (Steve Correll) writes: > I think there's a missing constraint in F88 draft S8.112 section 9.4.1. It > correctly forbids "REC=" with list-directed formatting, but does not forbid > "REC=" with a namelist. On p. 9-3, lines 21-22 (Direct Access section) it says that "The records of the file must not be read or written using list-directed, nonadvancing, or namelist formatting", so technically it is covered, but I think someone missed adding the constraint exactly where you indicated it should be.