forums.silverfrost.com

DanRRight · Posted: Sun Jul 10, 2022 3:06 pm Post subject:

Paul,
When playing with Warwick University 3D PIC code written in Fortran 2003 i found that it is so incredibly fast that actually works even on a single core and runs in less than 1 minute many test examples. It also probably will run on a cell phone or even calculator if it has good amount of memory. With other PIC codes i sometimes run for a month on a supercomputer Smile

)

At the same time it is so advanced in using all these new Fortran features and also is written so pedantically (sometimes you feel that this is not a Fortran but some kind of perversion, a crazy puzzle, a dialect of Maya language. It took me 3 months to crack this nut, and i still not fully understand few things) that if you need to check compatibility of your added 2003-2008 features to FTN95 then i suggest using this code as a bench. You can just omit MPI parallelization, which can be added later.

DanRRight · Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2022 1:32 am Post subject:

P.S. Use tar.gz not zip archive version from their GitHub, zipped one misses stuff (as they mentioned themselves. Not sure why they do that as if there are problems with the download file sizes nowadays. May be also zip hiccups somewhere). Also observing 50 times faster compilation speed (i compile it for 6 minutes on Linux supercomputer) will make you happy every day Smile

PaulLaidler · Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2022 6:45 am Post subject:

Dan

What does it use from Fortran 2003 that is not available with FTN95?

DanRRight · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2022 8:13 pm Post subject:

If FTN95 worked on Linux and supported its Make utility for compilation answering this question would take 5 seconds. So far i have not succeeded to compile this large Fortran 2003 code with FTN95 on Windows...

Robert · Joined: 29 Nov 2006 Posts: 457 Location: Manchester

Surely there are other 'makes' around.

DanRRight · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2022 2:16 pm Post subject:

I tried few times but never succeeded to adopt Make to use with FTN95. It is probably possible and doable but not a piece of cake. No one also was able to help me here when i asked questions about using Make. There also are differences between Linux and Windows Make utilities besides the fact that their languages substantially differ from command prompt commands we typically somewhat familiar with. And if Make for FTN95 is also a bit different from other compilers - you will not touch Make with FTN95!

As a result i usually failed with Make and end up with file by file batch compilation. When there are few files it's ok, but when there are 100s interdependable files with their modules using other modules you end up with the hell. While all other Fortran compilers have zero worries about that.

I'd be glad to see FTN95 joined all other a half a dozen (essentially all currently available on the market) Fortran compilers to use Make they seems all use with no problems, you just change one single keyword in Makefile file like Intel to PGI or to gfortran or to g95 or IBM or even the ones i never heard about Archer or Hector and all just works. No any hell with module dependencies, and when you edit only one source file - only one file is recompiled.

Since we are approaching broad adoption of multiprocessor calculations by masses, adding OpenMP support, synchronize FTN95 with other compilers in most of their options (including Make, ensuring better compatibility of binary read/write file formats, may be also improving compatibility of LIB files with at least Intel Fortran) and ideally supporting also Linux, would be beneficial for FTN95. Windows and Unix were completely abandoned by supercomputers lately, there only Linux rules now.

PaulLaidler · Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2022 2:27 pm Post subject:

Simon

The character handling features that you mention above have now been added for the next release of FTN95.

DanRRight · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 7:17 am Post subject:

Paul,
Have anyone asked to add Fortran 2008 feature NORM2 ? It's kind of unusual that it is not even in the Fortran90/95, because it is useful function and would be not hard to implement.

Besides, this code demonstrating NORM2 and some other tricks surprisingly runs on other compilers (look at the syntax of defining X)

PaulLaidler · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 8:01 am Post subject:

Dan

I will add NORM2 to the list of missing features from the 2008 standard.

Regarding afivo-pic, please provide a short working program that illustrates the what is missing from FTN95.

JohnCampbell · Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 2615 Location: Sydney

I am not familiar with the history of NORM2, but I do use a similar RMS function, which I thought was more often used ?

Kenneth_Smith · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 10:21 am Post subject:

If adding NORM2 to FTN95, then perhaps also consider HYPOT?

hypot(x,y) = sqrt(x*x + y*y) = abs(complex(x,y))

PaulLaidler · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 1:26 pm Post subject:

I have added HYPOT to the list.

DanRRight · Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2022 10:29 am Post subject: Re:

PaulLaidler · Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2022 4:13 pm Post subject:

Dan

Some of the #define's illustrated here are not currently supported by FTN95.

Preprocessing instructions, such as these that are common to the language C, are not Fortran standard conforming.

Our first priority is to add useful features from the 200x Fortran standards that are not currently supported.

mecej4 · Joined: 31 Oct 2006 Posts: 1899

Dan, if he bothered to perform the RTFM ritual at least once a year, would have typed the compilation command as