[petsc-users] Fortran interface -- low level access to petsc data

[Hossein Talebi]

Thank you for your answer.

It is not true that F2003 support is that limited: Gfortran, Intel Fortran,
Cray Fortran, IBM Fortran and PGI Fortran all support nearly full F2003.
Some other ones support the C portability of F2003 although not supporting
the rest.

* I can contribute on creating this interface. I have experience with F2003
to C++ and it works fine while C is a lot easier. My idea is to create the
F03 interface to petsc as a separate tool. So, anyone trying to use petsc
with a F03 compiler can compile this interface again to avoid the compiler
inconsistency of Modules.

We can work on a python (or similar) script to generate the interfaces. For
example, a project called gtk-fortran uses this method. Can any of you guys
help a little for planning the interface design?


Cheers
Hossein












On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Oct 2013, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Hossein Talebi <
> talebi.hossein at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > >  Hello All,
> > >
> > > I am trying to use petsc with Fortran. The initial mechanism to use
> petsc
> > > with FORTRAN77 that works fine. However, I found the Fortran 90
> interfaces
> > > difficult to work with. The very first issue is one has to recompile
> petsc
> > > with the Fortran compiler in case different to the one which was used
> to
> > > create the Fortran Mod files.
>
> Yes - one cannot mix fortran code compiled with 2 different compilers
> - or 2 different version of the same compiler wrt modules.
>
> But we generally recommend not mixing compilers   for C aswell as
> this
> can cause problems.
>
> Also you don't need to use modules to get f90 interfaces. You can include
> the f90 interface include files    directly in your code.
>
> #incude "finclude/petsc.h90"
>
> > > Also, we would still need to use C type
> > > #include statements along with Fortran 'use' statement which is not so
> > > optimal.
>
> Even if you were to use f90 modules #include is unavoidable as we still
> have other stuff in include files.
>
> check include/finclude/petscsysdef.h  include/finclude/petscsys.h
>
> > > Since Fortran 2003 offers great interface to C, did anyone try to
> write a
> > > F03 interface to petsc? Using F03 features, we can have very low data
> > > access to petsc database as well.
> > >
> >
> > F2003 support is fairly thin in the compiler world, and we have not had
> > much call for it. We do gratefully accept contributions.
>
> Currently we have the f90 interfaces [in include/finclude/ftn-auto/]
> automatically generated by bfort tool from the C interface. So to
> support F03 it would be ideal if there is such a tool. [or update
> bfort to do it]
>
> Satish
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20131027/56033daa/attachment.html>