[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[no subject]

Hi,

>Date: 12 Jun 1997 10:30:30 -0500 
>From: "Steve Mauget" <address@hidden>
>Organization: USDA
>To: "Steve E" <address@hidden>
>Keywords: 199706021417.IAA27579

In the above message, Steve Mauget wrote:

> I feel kind of unqualified to act
> as a go-between between two guys whose understanding of compilers is
> much greater than mine, and am afraid something is being lost in the
> translation.

I'm trying to help Steve Mauget build our netCDF package using the NAG
f90 compiler.  On his behalf, I'm taking this opportunity to contact you
personally.  Since Mauget is a NAG f90 client, I hope this is OK with
you.

The problem that Mauget is experiencing stems from the NAG f90
compiler not supporting constructs like the following:

      integer*1 a(2)
      integer   b(2)

      call sub(a)
      call sub(b)

The above is conforming Fortran-77 (modulo the "integer*1" datatype
-- but I suspect the problem would occur even if "a" was "real").  My
reading of the Fortran-90 standard (I have a copy) indicates that the
above should be conforming Fortran-90 as well.  Note that I'm not trying
to "overload" the "sub" procedure -- indeed, the correct behavior of the
netCDF package requires that control be transferred to the exact same
entry point in both cases.  Nor is there an interface block definition
in scope (strictly speaking, there doesn't need to be one and we're
trying to maintain backward compatibility with Fortran-77).

If you disagree, I would be much obliged if you would you help
me correct my understanding by referring me to the relevant
chapter-and-verse of the Fortran-90 standard that excludes this
construct.  Please feel free to be as specific as possible.

Thank you for your time.

Regards,
Steve Emmerson