Clive Page suggested:
> read(11) (j=1,10)
>
> which seems neater than having a do-loop wrapped around the read
> statement - is this allowed?
Nice try, but this one is not allowed. An implied-DO has to have some data
element; and indeed, its only function is to expand the data-element-list,
it doesn't cause multiple executions of the READ. For instance
WRITE(11) (x(i),i=1,10)
writes one record containing 10 reals (presumably!), whereas
DO i=1,10
WRITE(11) x(i)
END DO
writes 10 records each containing 1 real.
Cheers,
--
...........................Malcolm Cohen, NAG Ltd., Oxford, U.K.
([log in to unmask])
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________
|