Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.programming
Subject: Re: fortran 77 errors
Date: 24 Jun 2011 20:08:12 GMT
Organization: None
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <96k95cF6crU2@mid.individual.net>
References: <4e025412$0$1945$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net> <upn607pod3lim761db8b7e9p614j97htl1@4ax.com> <96hbkqF7dvU2@mid.individual.net> <0.35e0cd98d1ba5131b62a.20110623223910BST.8739j09qip.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
X-Trace: individual.net C9+z38dGCxo/Z9I5EyAaNw1czLYUsdOCQtsCvM+WqTPadHnAq1
X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZUeeiIq2CckUT1qLTiolA89VSuo=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.programming:534

In article <0.35e0cd98d1ba5131b62a.20110623223910BST.8739j09qip.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
Ben Bacarisse  <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> writes:
> <snip>
> > For what it's worth, Fortran 77 supports both statement labels
> > *and* line numbers -- the latter being positioned after column 72 
> > and ignored by the compiler.  Line numbers were useful back in
> > the punched-card days; diligently numbering all the lines of one's
> > program meant that if one dropped the card deck containing the source
> > code, one could put the cards back in order using a card-sorting
> > machine on the columns (73-80) containing the line numbers.
> 
> These columns were not restricted to "line numbers".  For one thing, it
> was common for them not to be sequential so that cards could be added
> without renumbering everything, 

Quite -- that's what I meant, though admittedly not what I said!
(Choosing a good increment between successive whatever-you-call-'ems
was sometimes tricky, too.)

> and the field often contained something
> to identify the program.  That way, if you dropped a box with more than
> one program in it, you could get it back into order in less than a day
> and a half.

Oh right -- I had forgotten that indeed it was typical for the "line
numbers" to also include alphabetic text identifying the program.

A quick Google search seems to confirm my recollection that these
things (text plus number) are called "sequence numbers".

I'm remembering too that some keypunches had features that would
to some extent automate producing sequence numbers.  I could be
wrong about that.

> My speciality was to forget to flip the metal card catcher back after
> removing a deck from the output hopper.  The next deck that went though
> would then spray up into the room like geek confetti.  It was always an
> un-sequenced deck.
> 
> > Ah, the not-always-good old days!

And you left my comment in for good reason.  :-)

By the time I started writing nontrivial programs (as opposed to
short homeworks and such), I had access to electronic editors [*],
so I don't have good war stories about cards.  But I can imagine.
I did have a summer job at which my tasks involved a bit of 
keypunching and the occasional use of a card sorter.  Those were
the days?

[*] Starting with the line editor available under MVS/TSO.
By today's standards it was unbelievably primitive, but compared
to cards, *WHAT* an improvement ....

"Thanks for the memories"?  

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.