Re: Standards question regarding intrinsics with complex arguments
- From: Paul van Delst <Paul.vanDelst@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:29:44 -0400
Richard Maine wrote:
Paul van Delst <Paul.vanDelst@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I believe the code in question is standard Fortran95 and that the compiler[also cites the intrinsic descriptions from the standard]
is incorrect in producing these warnings. Section 4.3.1.3 (Complex Types)
of the Fortran95 standard states:
"Each approximation method used to represent data entities of
type real shall be available for both the real and imaginary
parts of a data entity of type complex....
An IBM person has since told me that:
<quote>
...I suspect the standard does not require an implementation to support
any precision in complex intrinsic functions other than the default.
Therefore aimag(z) is only standards compliant if z is a default precision
complex number.
</quote>
That is just plain wrong. There isn't any defensible basis for it. You
have the relevant citations already. At the least, since the standard
requires supporty of double precision real, the citations you found also
require support of double precision complex, including all the relevant
intrinsics. For double precision, there just is no "out".
[additional comments snipped]
Thanks very much, Richard. It was just the backbone strengthening I needed to continue haranguing (in a collegial manner, of course) the support folks.
cheers,
paulv
.
- References:
- Standards question regarding intrinsics with complex arguments
- From: Paul van Delst
- Re: Standards question regarding intrinsics with complex arguments
- From: Richard Maine
- Standards question regarding intrinsics with complex arguments
- Prev by Date: Re: PGI wierdness with .EQV.
- Next by Date: Re: Standards question regarding intrinsics with complex arguments
- Previous by thread: Re: Standards question regarding intrinsics with complex arguments
- Next by thread: Re: Standards question regarding intrinsics with complex arguments
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|