forums.silverfrost.com

PaulLaidler · Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2022 6:48 am Post subject:

Simon

I will add Example 1 to the wish list and Example 2 demonstrates an omission that needs fixing.

PaulLaidler · Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:53 am Post subject:

Dan

Thanks for the feedback. We will explore the possibility of adding to the wiki.

simon · Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 299

Sorry to add more to the wish-list - it would be nice to get the 2008 intrinsic functions FindLoc, MaxLoc and MinLoc added.

PaulLaidler · Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2022 7:20 am Post subject:

Simon

MAXLOC and MINLOC are in the Fortran 90/95 standard (unless you need the extra KIND or BACK arguments) so they are already provided.

I could add FINDLOC to the wish list but it will be of limited use for real arrays where a test for equality usually needs a tollerance value.

simon · Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 299

Thanks Paul - I was only interested in FindLoc for integer arrays. I'd forgotten that MaxLoc and MinLoc were already available - sorry, but that's at least something less for you to do!

PaulLaidler · Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2022 7:15 am Post subject:

Simon

For a quick work-around you could use MINLOC. For example, for a 1D array

simon · Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 299

Hi Paul,
That's a nice work around for now. But I'm curious as to why the following code does not allow line 8 (the second instance of MinLoc), but does allow line 7 (the first instance).

PaulLaidler · Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2022 7:03 am Post subject:

Simon

The Standard defines the result as being a vector (in this context) so the compiler should complain when you assign a vector to a scalar.

Note also that, in general, (:) is not helpful because FTN95 does not always distinguish this from an array section which generates in a temporary copy.

simon · Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 299

Hi Paul,
Since j is a scalar, should not the compiler complain at line 7?
Simon

PaulLaidler · Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2022 5:51 pm Post subject:

Simon

Yes. I may need to take a closer look at this.

Is it important? Can you get it to work?

simon · Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 299

Hi Paul,
Not important. I have worked around this. In this case I'm simply working from the attitude that all bug reports may be potentially useful.
Thanks,
Simon

PaulLaidler · Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2022 8:39 am Post subject:

FINDLOC has now been added to FTN95 and the associated DLLs but without the KIND and BACK arguments at the momnent.

simon · Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 299

Excellent! Thank you.
On another 2008 topic, are there any plans for submodules? Again not urgent from my side. I would simply use them to break up some large files, so their absence is not a big issue.

PaulLaidler · Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2022 3:29 pm Post subject:

Simon

The subject of SUBMODULEs has been raised recently elsewhere on this forum and I did briefly look at its definition.

A SUBMODULE is not a simple extension of the concept of a MODULE. Also a MODULE is already extremely complex from point of view of the compiler. You can have modules within modules and at each level components can be private to the module. Then there is the complexity of USE ONLY.

So my initial impression is that to add SUBMODULEs would involve a very large investment of time.

simon · Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 299

Understood. I can certainly manage without submodules high on the priority list fo rnow.