Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.lang.fortran    |    Putting John Backus on a giant pedestal    |    5,127 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 4,703 of 5,127    |
|    Lynn McGuire to R Daneel Olivaw    |
|    Re: Is there a way in Fortran to designa    |
|    03 Oct 24 14:34:01    |
      From: lynnmcguire5@gmail.com              On 10/3/2024 12:02 PM, R Daneel Olivaw wrote:       > Steven G. Kargl wrote:       >> On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 14:45:31 +0200, R Daneel Olivaw wrote:       >>       >>> Lynn McGuire wrote:       >>>> I need many of my integers to be integer*8 in my port to 64 bit. In       >>>> C/C++ code, I can say 123456L to mean a long long value, generally 64       >>>> bit. Is there a corresponding way to do this in Fortran or am I stuck       >>>> with:       >>>>       >>>> call xyz (1)       >>>>       >>>> subroutine xyz (ivalue)       >>>> integer*8 ivalue       >>>> ...       >>>> return end       >>>>       >>>> must be:       >>>>       >>>> integer*8 ivalue       >>>> ...       >>>> ivalue = 1       >>>> call xyz (ivalue)       >>>>       >>>       >>> This is not actually a Fortran issue as such, it's all about a specific       >>> compiler (GNU Fortran).       >>       >> If we overlook the nonstandard type in the declaration, and agree       >> that the compiler will accept 'integer*8', then the program is       >> still invalid Fortran. It's technically not a Fortran issue. It       >> is a programmer issue.       >>       >       > Take a pragmatic approach, if that's the way the compiler wants you to       > do it then do it that way.       > Years ago I was converting a suite of programs from one OS/hardware       > platform to another. One program had serious problems because type       > "real" had insufficient precision on the new machine, that machine       > offered a compile option which meant "real" automatically meant "double       > precision" and - after checking for "equivalence" and common" statements       > - that's the way I went. Problem solved. This was back in the days of       > Fortran IV but I don't think I've ever seen anyone assigning Hollerith       > values to Real numbers so that was not a problem either.              My code used to assign Hollerith to Real numbers but I ripped that out       years ago in a project to get rid of Hollerith.              Lynn              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca