Re: busting sp datatypes
- From: glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:06:28 -0800
wim wrote:
(I wrote)
KIND(0) will be the appropriate KIND for default
(single precision) integer. (Though integer data is
not usually described as single and double precision.)
There may not be a standard way to generate a double
length integer variable.
what about using selected_int_kind?
$ cat int.f90
program int
implicit none
integer :: i
do i = 1,20
print *, i, selected_int_kind(i)
end do
end program int
This should show you what you need for a double length integer.
Here, it gives: 1,2,4, and 8. 4 is the one you get with a default
integer.
That shows you something longer than a default integer,
but doesn't guarantee it is twice as long. (A system
might have integers of 16, 32, and 48 bits, for example.)
C_SIZEOF(), when available, might be the only way to find
the actual amount of storage taken up by a variable
(including padding bits internal to the variable, or
that are necessary between such variables).
-- glen
.
- References:
- Re: busting sp datatypes
- From: glen herrmannsfeldt
- Re: busting sp datatypes
- From: wim
- Re: busting sp datatypes
- Prev by Date: Re: Most efficient way to write a large matrix to disk
- Next by Date: Re: Most efficient way to write a large matrix to disk
- Previous by thread: Re: busting sp datatypes
- Next by thread: Re: busting sp datatypes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
