Talk:Arithmetic IF

"more powerful?"

I feel it's a bit misleading to characterize the binary logical IF as "more powerful" than the trinary arithmetic IF. They undeniably are different, but the arithmetic IF is more subtle, more open to error, and offers an additional potential outcome. Overall, these are characteristics that I regard as "powerful." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patent.drafter (talk • contribs) 14:12, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Arithmetic IF can replace a three-way computed GOTO, and probably in a few other cases do something that logical IF can't. But logical IF can use a more complicated expression, with .AND. and .OR. in it, with many terms and otherwise much more powerful than arithmetic IF. Also, with the ability to put a non GOTO into logical IF, when only one statement needs to be conditionally executed, it is much easier to follow. But most arithmetic IF are used when only two choices, duplicating one choice, are used. Gah4 (talk) 21:38, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arithmetic IF. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080221163807/http://www.liv.ac.uk:80/HPC/HTMLF90Course/HTMLF90CourseNotesnode34.html to http://www.liv.ac.uk/HPC/HTMLF90Course/HTMLF90CourseNotesnode34.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:57, 17 October 2016 (UTC)