Re: Structure of large link libraries in f95

Seems I heard of some potential problem with ALLOCATABLEs, but I can't remember what. Was it a problem with bounds check?
Using allocatables as defined in F90/F95 is quite reliable. There are sometimes problems with using the TR-15581 allocatable features, which is still not supported on all compilers. This allows complex things like allocatables inside of allocatables, and allocating an allocatable dummy-argument in a subroutine.

However, I consider ALLOCATABLEs without the features of the TR to be
basically broken - they only make sense if you can use the extended
features offered by the TR.

To reply to Charles, the problem is not with bounds checking, it is with
implementing all features correctly in the generated code and in the run-
time support. Nice (and necessary!) features such as default initialization
of an INTENT(OUT) ALLOCATABLE dummy argument require a lot of behind-the-
scenes work that has to be correctly implemented, or Strange Things will
happen.

Given that people start to find two public-domain compilers useable with
these features, I would say that as of today, there is no longer a reason
not to use ALLOCATABLEs to their full extent.

Jan
.