```
program weather_report
  implicit none


  character(len=*), parameter :: msg = "날씨가 좋아요."

  call say_weather(msg)

contains

  subroutine say_weather(text)
    implicit none
    character(len=*), intent(in) :: text
    write(*,'(A)') trim(text)
  end subroutine say_weather

end program weather_report
```

Edit: I used to use this syntax, though:

```
PROGRAM WEATHER_REPORT

      CHARACTER*40 MSG
      INTEGER I

      MSG = '날씨가 좋아요.'

      I = 1
 10   IF (I .GT. 1) GOTO 20
      CALL SAYWEATHER(MSG)
      I = I + 1
      GOTO 10

 20   STOP
      END


      SUBROUTINE SAYWEATHER(TEXT)
      CHARACTER*40 TEXT

 30   PRINT *, TEXT
      GOTO 40

 40   RETURN
      END
```

> Yes. So don't waste too much time. For your refactoring, especially in fortran, I'd go the way of 3, simply because you don't want to introduce sloppy architecture.

@south_korea_ln how's the weather, in any other language?

adlai

Yes. So don't waste too much time. For your refactoring, especially in fortran, I'd go the way of 3, simply because you don't want to introduce sloppy architecture.

I posted a bit about this process yesterday, in 

If your software were something like openssl or the linux kernel or in general something considered best in class and has gotten a couple 100k installs, you want to be extremely careful. This is what 4 is for.

SN release: what you see is what you get (wysiwyg) editor

k00b

Yes. So don't waste too much time. For your refactoring, especially in fortran, I'd go the way of 3, simply because you don't want to introduce sloppy architecture.

I posted a bit about this process yesterday, in https://stacker.news/items/1452322/r/optimism?commentId=1452429.

If your software were something like openssl or the linux kernel or in general something considered best in class and has gotten a couple 100k installs, you want to be extremely careful. This is what 4 is for.