Re: busting sp datatypes

Richard Maine wrote:
LR <lruss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

IIRC equivalence is being depreciated,

Not formally in the standard. In fact the concept of deprecation was
dropped from the f90 draft before it ever got formally into the
standard. Plenty of individuals (myself included) personally consider
equivalence to be deprecated, but that needs to be qualified as a
position of the individuals in question instead of just is "is being
deprecated".

but would it be of help here to equivalence
character*7 x(10)
to something like
integer*1 x(7)(10)
I haven't had to worry about the order of those kinds of dimensions in
quite some time, so sorry if I got those wrong. Also, I'm not sure that
integer*1 is legal or even possible.

Well now we don't need to get into deprecation to see "issues" with
that. Equivalencing character with non-character data has never been
standard in the first place (which is quite a bit more severe then being
deprecated). Nor has the integer*1 syntax. Even among compilers that
accepted the nonstandard integer* syntax, some did not allow *1.

Ok, thanks for that. So is there a nice way to sort character*7 calling
C's qsort from Fortran?

On another, somewhat related topic, I was taking a look through what I
think is a recent draft, March 2008, of the 2008 standard. The examples
of C structs in that standard don't seem quite right to me. They seem
to be missing the squiggly brackets '{' and '}'. I could be wrong, but
I don't think the examples are correct C.

Perhaps this has already been corrected? Although I did a quick search
there I'm not familiar enough with the j3-fortran.org site to figure
that out. Or maybe the brackets are in there and my pdf viewer isn't
working correctly? Perhaps I am wrong about my expectation of what C
structs should look like?

Do you happen to know?

I found this when I went past the section labeled "Decremental features"
and found myself reading about bind and other things in Appendix C of
this particular draft. I saw this C struct example:

struct pass int lenc, lenf; float *c, *f;;

which I think should be

struct pass { int lenc, lenf; float *c, *f; };

A search reveals at least one more example of this kind.

LR





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: ASDF-INSTALL for CMUCL, CLISP, AllegroCL, and LispWorks - plus tutorial
    ... >> REQUIRE and PROVIDE are deprecated in the ANSI standard. ... Deprecation does not mean disappearance. ... hope people aren't ignoring the use of REMOVE-IF-NOT just because it ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: C1X Draft
    ... "The gets function is obsolescent and deprecated". ... Obsolescent and deprecated items are still present in the standard (or ... after its deprecation. ... jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr ...
    (comp.std.c)
  • Re: C1X Draft
    ... "The gets function is obsolescent and deprecated". ... Obsolescent and deprecated items are still present in the standard (or ... implemented by any conforming implementation. ... after its deprecation. ...
    (comp.std.c)
  • Re: Free C Compiler on Windows
    ... It is not deprecated in the current standard. ... The purpose of deprecation is to warn ... It was first deprecated in C99 TC3. ... This is not a draft of the ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: C1X Draft
    ... Firstly, no, it would not satisfy the requirements. ... Since those features are deprecated this doesn't hurt. ... Since the time that the committee decided to deprecate gets, there has not yet been an official version of the standard published - this upcoming version will be the one in which it is deprecated. ... Deprecation means the feature is still fully supported and mandatory, but may be removed from some future standard. ...
    (comp.std.c)