...: In article <1181606944.775888.95110@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Terence <tbwright@cantv.net> wrote: The standard way to elimintae the output of a cr-lf in formmated output is to use the backslash '\' in the format statement, whenever you need to continue on the same line for the NEXT output...

In article <1181606944.775888.95110@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Terence <tbwright@cantv.net> wrote: The standard way to elimintae the output of a cr-lf in formmated output is to use the backslash '\' in the format statement, whenever you need to continue on the same line for the NEXT output (...

The standard way to elimintae the output of a cr-lf in formmated output is to use the backslash '\' in the format statement, whenever you need ... CVF supports this, because I use it. I prefer to write BINARY UNFORMATTED text without format statements, for any program-designed page writing (for example when writing a WORD- readable document by outputting RTF code)....

... it so... When you do a WRITE within a Do Loop to the console screen such as: Do IJK=1,10 WRITE(*,*) 'Loop Count = ', IJK ENDDO It will ... line on the screen for every write. How can it be formatted so ... but you could try carriage control '+' E.g. write(*,*)'+ ijk=',ijk or write...as a format specifier to suppress CR/LF in interactive output. It's...

Non-standard but works with CVF6.6 CLOSE(UNIT=6) OPEN(UNIT=6, CARRIAGECONTROL='FORTRAN') DO I = 1, 1000 WRITE(UNIT=6,FMT='("+ I =",1X, I4.4)') I ENDDO CLOSE(UNIT=6) OPEN(UNIT=6, CARRIAGECONTROL='LIST')

...> ... This problem was solved way back in Fortran-90, with ADVANCE='NO': .. But this doesn't work with CVF (at least my version). Nothing is output until an advance='yes')or a (write*,*) happens. So the only thing I see is the 'Loop Count = 10'... Sigh. And I even tested the above with g95 before posting.... ... (even with call flush(6) Does CVF use unit 6 for unit...

Walter Spector <w6ws_xthisoutx@earthlink.net> wrote: Terence wrote: When soething as silly as writing or not writing a carriage return line pair causes such traffic of opinion (heavens. even resorting to API's???), then something is wrong. This is Usenet. Of the two dozen replies to this thread, no one has given the correct answer yet. I recall doing so, which is ...

...stat_line implicit none integer :: i integer :: ileft, pxferr character, parameter :: CR = achar (13) ! Carraige return do, i=1, 10 write (*, '(2a,i4)', advance='no') CR, ' Loop Count = ', i ! Replace the sleep call with Real Work here ... ileft, pxferr) ! sleep for 1 second end do write (*,*) write (*,*) 'complete!' end program W.

...> When soething as silly as writing or not writing a carriage return line... doesn't have a separate CR and LF, but, like the underlying Selectric typewriter a newline function. Unlike...line, one logical record, with some control over the line spacing between records. If you send either CR or LF to an IBM 1403 printer ... have done it, including using CR and LF in character string constants in ...

STANDARDS are (well, WERE) supposed to help users of Fortran to have portability and to be a target for Compiler Vendors (bless their names..). When soething as silly as writing or not writing a carriage return line pair causes such traffic of opinion (heavens. even resorting to API's???), then something is wrong. Can we go back, remove [alternative] the standards committee, and start ...