[comp.lang.fortran] Results of the UGLY code.

steve@oakhill.UUCP (steve) (12/22/88)

So here are the results : (analysis follows)

 Computer                         Compiler         Result Er Msg Comment 
 -------------------------------- ---------------- ------ -----  -------
 AT&T 3B1 - UNIX PC Model 7300    SVS FORTRAN             Yes    2 
 AT&T 3B2/400 - 3B2/3B15 Computer FORTRAN 77 XLA+      92 *
 Apollo DN 3000 Aegis 9.7                           65785 *
 CRAY COS1.15                                           ? Yes    1
 Cray                             CFT                     Yes    4
 Cray                             CFT77                   Yes    4
 Cyber 205 Vsos 237                                       Yes    2
 -------------------------------- ---------------- ------ ----- -------
 Cyber 855 Nos 2.5.3                                   82 *
 Eta-10Q   R0120N2                                        Yes    2
 Harris H-800 VOS 7.1             sauf77               82 Yes
 Harris HCX-9 HCX/UX (unix)       f77                  82 No
 Harris HCX-9 HCX/UX (unix)       hf77                 92 No
 IBM PC/AT                        Professional FORTRAN    Yes    2,5
 ISTLA - Toolpack Static Analyser, Version 1.2            Yes    3
 -------------------------------- ---------------- ------ ----- -------
 Prime                            Fortran 66           92 *
 Prime                            Fortran 77            ? *      1
 Pyramid OSX4.0                                        80 *
 Rolm 1666                        Remora F77 (b-test)     Yes    2
 Rolm 1666                        Remora F77 (b-test)  80 Yes    2,6
 SUN OS 4.0                                            92 *
 SUN OS 4.2 rel 3.5                                    92 *
 -------------------------------- ---------------- ------ ----- -------
 VAX/VMS 4.7                                           92 *

*It should be pointed out that it is probably safe to assume if the result
I recieved did not mention a warning message, the compiler probably did not
generate one.

Index to comments :
 1  Infinite loop generated
 2  Error reported from compiler - compiler produced no code.
 3  Portability anaylzer, not compiler
 4  Final answer not given in post.
 5  Compiler made by Ryan-McFarland Corporation
 6  Option to enable block jumping turned on. Ansi compatablity warning given.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let us look at what the proper responses should be.  There are actually
three.  The first is that the compiler can error out and produce no code.
Of the compilers that were reported, five did this.  One of these had
a compiler option to compile through this, generating the next proper
response, 80.  80 is the result that is generated when the outer do
loop misses the K = K + 1 increment (as if a continue existed at that
line).  Only one other compiler generated this result.  The other correct
result is 82.  This the 80 result plus two increments for K = K + 1
from the outer loop.  Only three compilers got this answer.

Of the wrong answers recieved, they fell into two catagories : 92 and
infinitely large (or loops).  92 was the most common response to the
code, given by six compilers.  This leads me to suspect I fail to see
what the code is to do, but I believe that these compilers do two
increments on the internal loop jump-out.  As for the infinite answers
three computers answered this way.  I generated this case knowing that
on some compilers (specifically the Apollo), DO loops are generated 
technically wrong in order to make them perform extensions.

Wish to thanks the following people for sending me results :

Albert Hybl, PhD.  Dept. Biophysics, U of Maryland School of Medicine
Dan Packman        NCAR   Boulder, CO
David Huelsbeck    Los Alamos National Laboratory
Mike McCants       Execucom Systems Corp.  
Paul Hinker        Eta Systems, Inc.  
Richard Brittain   School of Elect. Eng.  Cornell University 

                   enough from this mooncalf - Steven
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
These opinions aren't necessarily Motorola's or Remora's - but I'd like to
think we share some common views.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven R Weintraub                        cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!devsys!steve
Motorola Inc.  Austin, Texas 
(512) 440-3023 (office) (512) 453-6953 (home)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------