Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95
- From: robert.corbett@xxxxxxx
- Date: 29 Mar 2006 22:03:52 -0800
Charles Russell wrote:
I cited LAPACK as an example that might be of general interest, and for
which LAPACK90 shows just how ugly option 2 can get. What I am really
interested in is what to do with my big library of old f77 math
routines, which I like to keep at my fingertips for model building,
should I switch to f95. The compiler would then have to do the kinds of
type checking that I now obtain with ftnchek.
I asked approximately this same question about five years ago, but
perhaps less clearly, and perhaps there has been some progress in the
interim.
Compile-to-archive was a commonly requested option about
ten years ago. It isn't intrinsically hard to do, but Sun's compiler
is not structured in a way that makes it easy. I don't know why
the requests for compile-to-archive stopped, but they did. If
people had continued to request it, Sun might have delivered it.
Bob Corbett
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95
- From: simon
- Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95
- References:
- Structure of large link libraries in f95
- From: Charles Russell
- Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95
- From: robert . corbett
- Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95
- From: Charles Russell
- Structure of large link libraries in f95
- Prev by Date: Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95
- Next by Date: Re: C versus FORTRAN90
- Previous by thread: Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95
- Next by thread: Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|