Re: compilation problem with module function interface definition

Richard E Maine wrote:
> In article
> <u4vce.162973$cg1.95547@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> "James Giles" <jamesgiles@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Mixed mode between binary and decimal
>> of approximately the same precisions should probably result in
>> binary for best results.
>>
>> Unfortunately, Fortran makes the reverse decision.
>
> I'd suggest that, assuming compilers supporting both both binary and
> decimal floats start appearing, it would be wise for users to avoid
> such mixed-mode operations. [...]

Well, the problem arises under the assumption that the default KIND
for numeric literals was a decimal KIND (as previously suggested
in this thread). Given that there are many good reasons that users
might want their variables and intermediate calculations to use a
binary KIND, the mixed mode is hard to avoid unless you don't use
literals at all.

--
J. Giles

"I conclude that there are two ways of constructing a software
design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously
no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated
that there are no obvious deficiencies." -- C. A. R. Hoare


.