Re: Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- From: Paul van Delst <Paul.vanDelst@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:52:36 -0400
dpb wrote:
Clive Page wrote:I whether anyone else would agree that it may be time to legitimise the...
usage of data declarations of the form REAL*8, INTEGER*2 etc
I don't think that's the right solution to the SELECTED_REAL_KIND() cumbersomeness, though, either; so I'd also vote "no".
Hello,
Could someone explain to me the cumbersomeness of SELECTED_REAL(INT)_KIND() ??
I agree the syntax is a bit wordy, but doesn't one define these things (i.e. different kind types) once in a module and then use that module where I need anything other than default REALs/INTs? And then forget about it?
Are people saying that they actually use the intrinsic SELECTED_REAL(INT)_KIND() directly in every program/module they write when they need non-default reals or ints?
cheers,
paulv
.
I'll note I'm as guilty as any in using REAL*N as any when writing for Windows platform code that has a obvious limited usage outside the environment (essentially any and everything I tend to do).
OTOH, if I were writing code in an environment w/ a variety of platforms or that was likely to be useful in a more general context (some computational library or similar, say), I'd be far more concerned about the portability issues and pay far more attention to write for that environment.
--
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- From: Richard Maine
- Re: Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- References:
- Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- From: Clive Page
- Re: Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- From: dpb
- Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- Prev by Date: Re: Fortran 90 and GUIs
- Next by Date: Re: Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- Previous by thread: Re: Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- Next by thread: Re: Is it time to legitimise REAL*8 etc?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|