(j3.2006) Interp F08/0055: G editing for reals

[Thomas Henlich]

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 04:29, Malcolm Cohen <malcolm at nag-j.co.jp> wrote:
> Thomas Henlich wrote:
>>
>> 3. Is it intended that (RC,1P,G11.1) editing applied to 0.096 should
>> output "0.1" when (1P,E11.1) editing would output "9.6E-02" which does
>> not fall into the F editing range and represents the result with a
>> higher precision than the first?
>
> Yes. ?RC is what F90 specified, so this is as required by F90. ?I'm not sure
> what the problem here is unless it is that you are complaining that the G
> edit descriptor has always been silly when scale factors are involved.
...
> And this is how it has been for a very long time.

Malcolm,

thanks for confirming what I already suspected. I just brought it up
so we are absolutely clear that we don't base any new changes on a
previous error or oversight; or at least not on one that is not too
old to fix now ;-)

Thomas