From gb at stat.umu.se  Fri Aug 26 13:46:50 2005
From: gb at stat.umu.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Brostr=F6m?=)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 13:46:50 +0200
Subject: [Rd] Fortran (Was: Re: [R] linux compile options (64-bit))
In-Reply-To: <20050802101208.GA32181@stat.umu.se>
References: <22761BFE-8A79-4A81-966F-6E863E556A83@comcast.net>
	<5FD5AD51-2B4A-4669-AC0F-DBD1541B10E8@comcast.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0508020729350.19394@gannet.stats>
	<20050802081040.GA28478@stat.umu.se>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0508020914500.21072@gannet.stats>
	<20050802092351.GA30688@stat.umu.se>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0508021052020.25929@gannet.stats>
	<20050802101208.GA32181@stat.umu.se>
Message-ID: <20050826114650.GA23719@stat.umu.se>

On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 12:12:08PM +0200, G?ran Brostr?m wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 10:58:31AM +0100, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> 
> > The problems we are seeing with gcc4 are mainly (but not 
> > entirely) with gfortran: it seems not quite ready for production use.
> > -4.0.1 is already a considerable improvement over -4.0.0.
> > 
> > There is another project (www.g95.org) that is using a slightly different 
> > version of these sources, and either g95 or gfortran can be used with 
> > gcc3 if you want to use F95 sources.  However, F95 is unlikely to be 
> > suitable for use in distributed R packages for a long time to come.
> 
> Thanks; I'll stick to 3.4.4(!) and f77 for the time being.

One short follow-up question on the F77/95 theme: In my CRAN packages, I use
the construct "do while ... end do" in my fortran sources. This is AFAIK not
strict F77, but an extension in g77, and standard in F95. "-pedantic" does not 
complain about this; on the other hand "---it finds some non-ANSI
practices, but not all" (from 'man g77').

Should I rewrite the "do while...end do" parts? (Please answer NO!:)


G?ran



[Rd] Fortran (Was: Re: [R] linux compile options (64-bit))
=?iso-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Brostr=F6m?=