(j3.2006) Select Rank

Keith Bierman khbkhb
Wed Feb 18 11:10:14 EST 2015

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:57 AM, Malcolm Cohen <malcolm at nag-j.co.jp> wrote:

> ?...
>   fpp is better, but
> even so it's not official and not 100% portable.  And doesn't solve the
> tool
> problem.

?Well, the fpp source code is available, and reasonably portable.  If
memory serves, it does put appropriate markings in the code that some tools
(many debuggers) use to get the line numbering right.

One hazard is on systems which don't properly supported mixed case file
names, bork.F90 becomes bork.f90, and can clobber bork.F90 on line 1 of
processing (got caught with this recently running Linux in a VM on a
clients Windows system, where the source was in a shared folder, rather
than inside the VM itself). An obvious approach would be to change the fpp
processor to use .ftn and .f90 or some such?.

?But I take your point, it would be cleaner to have an all Fortran
solution. I'm not sure I buy "INCLUDE" as being much more pure than
#include, but the rest of the processing is where both the good and bad
lies ;>?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20150218/a7b96b61/attachment.html 

More information about the J3 mailing list