Silverfrost Forums

Welcome to our forums

Active DO loop index altered

21 Dec 2020 2:34 #26813

Hi

Occasionally i get the 'Active Do loop index altered' message when i'm debugging. Needless to say that the line of code is doing no such thing (i.e. an output statement) .

It only seem to appear when only some of the code is complied in debug mode i.e.

ftn95 test1.for /debug ftn95 big_code.for ftn95 reliable_code.for /debug slink test1,big_code,reliable_code

The calling sequence is of the form Test1->big_code-> reliable_code

If this routine was in reliable_code.for

subroutine got_here(cbuff) character*() cbuff write(,*,err=99) cbuff 99 continue end

it would fail with 'Active DO loop index altered' on the write statement

I haven't been able to reproduce the effect with a small example. Compiling without the debug option and the code works as expected

I understand that it maybe hard to track down without a reproducible example but an awareness of the issue maybe helpful to you

steve

21 Dec 2020 2:39 #26814

Which version of the compiler are you using?

21 Dec 2020 2:46 #26815

Robert

ftn95 v8.70.0 Win xp 32

I have seen this message in previous versions and other platforms (win 8/10 64bit)

steve

21 Dec 2020 3:15 #26816

I presume you are using checkmate. You mentioned /debug but that doesn't check for the do loop being modified.

21 Dec 2020 3:20 #26817

Robert

/full_debug

steve

21 Dec 2020 3:57 #26819

steve

To make any progress, we would need some sample code that illustrates the failure.

If the failure concerns /FULL_DEBUG then you could switch it off before defining the routine...

options(-full_debug) subroutine got_here(cbuff) ...... end options(full_debug)

21 Dec 2020 4:51 #26821

Hi Paul

thanks for the quick response.

I understand these issues are next to impossible to resolve without a reproducible example. I will do some experimentation over the holiday period to see if i can isolate the problem

regards

steve

4 Jan 2021 12:28 #26862

Just wanted to add that I too have noticed this bug when running with undef.

4 Jan 2021 9:01 #26863

StamK

Can you demonstrate this bug with a short sample program?

Please login to reply.