Re: Pointers to functions: Is this the right [f03] syntax?
- From: nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard E Maine)
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 07:51:46 -0700
Andy <andyv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I've made a couple fixes and the current g95 can compile and run this
code fine now. I am worried that things may be a little too loose in
that the pointer p in the original code points to a subroutine, then
later on a function,
I don't see that in the code posted here, though I suppose it might be
so in the prior posting to gg95 (I don't often read that group).
I can't seem to find anything prohibiting
that. Did I miss something?
I'd have to see the code (as mentioned above, I don't see anything like
that in the posting here). But I guess even then, I wouldn't be sure.
Seems to me I recall some debate on related questions (even without
pointer involvement - might have been dummy args, which are like
pointers in some senses). I'm not sure whether it was definitively
answered.
I can give a definitive answer as to my opinion of a coding practice
that would do that, but that's a different question. :-)
--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: my first.last at org.domain| experience comes from bad judgment.
org: nasa, domain: gov | -- Mark Twain
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Pointers to functions: Is this the right [f03] syntax?
- From: Pere
- Re: Pointers to functions: Is this the right [f03] syntax?
- From: Richard E Maine
- Re: Pointers to functions: Is this the right [f03] syntax?
- From: Andy
- Pointers to functions: Is this the right [f03] syntax?
- Prev by Date: problem of block data contained in module
- Next by Date: Re: problem of block data contained in module
- Previous by thread: Re: Pointers to functions: Is this the right [f03] syntax?
- Next by thread: Re: Pointers to functions: Is this the right [f03] syntax?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|