<story><title>The perils of polishing old Fortran libraries</title><url>https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/the-perils-of-polishing-long/5444</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>zippyman55</author><text>My favorite personal Fortran story: I was passing by a WAY SMARTER THAN I COULD EVER HOPE FOR guy who was pouring over a two inch Print-out of some scientific code. He had been trying to troubleshoot a problem. I guess a comma was in the 80th column, which I recall presents an error. In my passing by, I pointed out the error (one second) and I always had his respect after that.</text></comment>
<story><title>The perils of polishing old Fortran libraries</title><url>https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/the-perils-of-polishing-long/5444</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>lmm</author><text>I mean the lesson I&amp;#x27;d take from that is &amp;quot;don&amp;#x27;t use a buggy compiler&amp;quot;. If you can&amp;#x27;t trust your tools then it&amp;#x27;s very hard to make something you can trust with them. That changing the code means it compiled in an incorrect way that your test case happened to hit doesn&amp;#x27;t mean the previous version of the code was being compiled correctly, or was correct code.</text></comment>