Re: Mixed language i/o sychronization

[Richard E Maine <Richard dot Maine at nasa dot gov>]

Maybe I missed it in this discussion, but has anyone brought up the 
subject of the F2003 FLUSH statement (which is also a common extension 
in earlier versions)?

Of course, that isn't guaranteed to solve all interlanguage I/O 
problems, but if I understand the particular current discussion, it 
would seem that it should solve the current I/O synchronization one and 
generally make the user's odds a lot higher.

It does require the user code to use the FLUSH statement, but I don't 
feel that is an unreasonable requirement. I would expect that in normal 
use, the number of places needing such synchronization would be modest. 
Users *OUGHT* to expect to pay at least some attention to the matter; 
if they think it will "just work" everywhere with no attention at all, 
then their expectations don't much match reality. Using the FLUSH 
statement allows the flushing to be done at the user-specified times 
when it is actually needed, rather than loosing the benefits of 
buffered I/O for the whole program or requiring the compiler to try to 
guess when flushing is needed.

--
Richard Maine                |  Good judgment comes from experience;
Richard.Maine@nasa.gov       |  experience comes from bad judgment.
                            |        -- Mark Twain