"Robin" wrote:
> Any random access should be on a byte basis, not on a unit basis.
>
> As an alternative, on a unit that is the size of a single variable
> specified in the I/O list. This would allow single-character access,
> integer word access, or whatever.
>
> Don't want processor-defined units. They aren't particularly portable,
> and in any case, wouldn't allow single-byte access.
>
Agreed!
<RANT>
"processor-defined units" are an abomination.
Their persistence, and particurlarly the POSIX committee's refusal
to specify what they mean for the POSIX Fortran bindings, is one of
the major obstacles to having portable Fortran at the source code
level.
And on this issue, backwards compatibility be damned!
imnho
</RANT>
Carlie J. Coats, Jr. [log in to unmask]
MCNC Environmental Programs phone: (919)248-9241
North Carolina Supercomputing Center fax: (919)248-9245
3021 Cornwallis Road P. O. Box 12889
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27709-2889 USA
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|