[petsc-dev] two quick questions on Fortran style/includes

[Jed Brown]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 18:46, Ethan Coon <ecoon at lanl.gov> wrote:

> Is there a reason that both .F and .F90 examples are in fixed format,
> even though .F90 files should be interpreted as free format?
>

I thought that was up to the compiler flags of the user's project. I think
the preference is to always write hybrid code in the examples so that
free/fixed compiler flags don't have to be sorted out at configure time and
so the user can use whatever convention they like.


>  I guess
> the fixed format works for either a fixed/free compiler, but it's ugly.
> I wouldn't be surprised if there was a portability issue with free
> format .F90 files, so I figured I'd check.
>

There is a Note in the standard showing how to write free/fixed hybrid
Fortran (non-normative, as pointed out by a gcc developer who didn't want to
fix the warning, http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42852).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20110510/dbff8892/attachment.html>