bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) (04/18/89)
In article <12171@lanl.gov> jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes: >From article <520@orange19.qtp.ufl.edu>, by bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt): >> READ (LUOUT, *) > >I'm not sure this is legal in the standard. The description of list >directed I/O does not include the case of an empty I/O list. Well, in ANSI X3.9-1978 page 12-10 lines 46 and 48 both show iolist as optional. Furthermore, nowhere in section 12.8, which covers READ, WRITE and PRINT Statements, and includes the cilist and iolist definitions is any qualification made about having to have an iolist present when using list-directed formats. On the other hand, as Jim points out, the discussion of list-directed formatting does not account for the possibility of an empty iolist. Has this problem ever been brought to X3J3 before? If so, can we find out what the decision was, otherwise maybe we should ask them about it (formally). BTW, The modification that Jim suggested, i.e. to use READ(5,'()') instead of READ (5,*) works "properly" on the Cray. Thanks. -- David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365