Re: NLEQ1 and open source Fortran
- From: "Rodrigo López Negrete" <soyrush@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 26 Aug 2005 11:14:49 -0700
Sorry, forgot to answer this:
> Commercial compilers, and Intel in particular, have hundreds of man-hours
> (man-years?) of paid development. Gfortran has been around for about
> 2 years with a very small group of unpaid, volunteer developers. Bugs
> are being fixed as quickly as time permits. You may have hit a bug,
> but without seeing the code and what you consider to be the correct
> results, it is hard to make suggestions.
I've got a couple of proven solutions to my problem, so I know what to
consider 'a correct solution'. Also, Intel's Fortran (ifort) returns
that 'correct solution', but since I'm trying to use only open source
codes/programs, I'm trying to use Gfortran...
>>From another message:
> This has nothing to do with the completeness of gfortran versus
> g95. The OP clearly states that gfortran can compile the code.
> Indeed, g95's use of an ancient version of the gcc backend may
> indicate that gfortran is a better choice.
Yes, this is true. I can compile and run the program using Gfortran.
The problem is ifort does returns a correct solution and Gfortran can't
do it. NLEQ1 returns 'Iteration terminates due to singular jacobian
matrix'.
--
Rodrigo López Negrete
http://muon.blogdns.org/~rush/
.
- References:
- NLEQ1 and open source Fortran
- From: rlopneg
- Re: NLEQ1 and open source Fortran
- From: Steven G. Kargl
- NLEQ1 and open source Fortran
- Prev by Date: Re: NLEQ1 and open source Fortran
- Next by Date: Re: portable 'sizeof' solution
- Previous by thread: Re: NLEQ1 and open source Fortran
- Next by thread: Re: NLEQ1 and open source Fortran
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|