View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008 Posts: 2927 Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 10:42 pm Post subject: __adjust_stack_f is missing |
|
|
Decided to try newer FTN95 Personal Edition
instead of my regular FTN95 (desactivated it temporally, removing from path)
Got this and other (mostly opengl - did you forgot to comment the last part of INS?) errors at link time
WARNING the following symbols are missing:
__SET_DATE_TIME_SEED
__alloc_times
CHECK_CONFORMANCE#
TEMPZPART1 Linker generated
Only the last subroutine is mine (but what means Linker generated) other seems are compiler internal ones. How they can come here? No compilation errors were noticed
The code starts Clearwin GUI OK, some subprograms run OK,
but then when I try to run some other parts of the code
it stops with the "__adjust_stack_f call to missing routine" error.
What this could mean? What are these missing routines ? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
PaulLaidler Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 Posts: 8217 Location: Salford, UK
|
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
__alloc_times is only in the latest salflibc.dll so there must be an old copy of this DLL getting in the way.
The other two are also in this DLL but they are old routines so I do not know why you are getting this message. Maybe if you use the new DLL everything will be OK. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008 Posts: 2927 Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, Paul, you were absolutely right, the older versions of libraries which were like roaches spreaded everywhere interered. No more missing compiler routines
But still the last message is still here:
TEMPZPART1 Linker generated
what it means? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
PaulLaidler Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 Posts: 8217 Location: Salford, UK
|
Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't know. Are you using IMPLICIT NONE everywhere? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008 Posts: 2927 Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Error disappeared, dissolved somehow by itself...was something wrong in my code.
No I never use implicit none. one can say that's bad habit. But this is thanks to FTN77/95 Its /undef is actually much more powerful than just static implicit none check for typos which I find pretty annoying in the codes. With other compilers without dynamical check for undefined variables though implicit note must be strictly enforced |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|