Re: backslash-issues
- From: Bart Vandewoestyne <MyFirstName.MyLastName@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:49:30 +0000 (UTC)
On 2005-06-30, Richard E Maine <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> That rather surprises me. The message makes no sense (there isn't an
> octal 350 character around anywhere) and doesn't look like something I'd
> expect from NAG. If I've got it right, octal 350 would be an "h" with
> the high order bit set, which just doesn't seem to fit.
I was also puzzled...
> I just tried this (Nag f95 5.0(322) on OSX) and it worked as expected. I
> even tried forcing nag to run fpp on it, just in case the problem was in
> there. Still worked fine. Makes me wonder whether a stray character got
> into the source file somehow.
The sourcefile is at
http://www.cs.kuleuven.be/~bartv/stuff/test_backslash.f95
As far as I can see, there's no strange character in there...
> You mentioned NAG 5.0(253), but I didn't notice which platform. NAG
> supports quite a few and every once in a while problems are unique to a
> specific port.
NAGWare Fortran 95 compiler Release 5.0(253)
Intel and compatible (x86) 32-bit Linux (Debian stable 'Sarge')
Bus as somebody else already pointed out in this thread, it is probably
something that is fixed in a later version.
Regards,
Bart
--
"Share what you know. Learn what you don't."
.
- References:
- backslash-issues
- From: Bart Vandewoestyne
- Re: backslash-issues
- From: Bart Vandewoestyne
- Re: backslash-issues
- From: Joost
- Re: backslash-issues
- From: Arjen Markus
- Re: backslash-issues
- From: Bart Vandewoestyne
- Re: backslash-issues
- From: Joost
- Re: backslash-issues
- From: Bart Vandewoestyne
- Re: backslash-issues
- From: Richard E Maine
- backslash-issues
- Prev by Date: Re: backslash-issues
- Next by Date: Re: backslash-issues
- Previous by thread: Re: backslash-issues
- Next by thread: Re: backslash-issues
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|