From: "Phillip Helbig" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 6:07 PM
>> > Of course, old code should not break. What about expanding IMPLICIT
>> > NONE? For example: IMPLICIT NOTYPE, NOKIND (NONE being an alias for
>> > NOTYPE). This could be expanded more later if needed. It would also be
>> > backwards compatible with old code.
>>
>> Yes and no. Old code would need the insertion of IMPLICIT NOTYPE ...
>
> As now, if there is no IMPLICIT statement at all, the Fortran77 rules
> apply.
In the context of CMPLX, and to be "backwards compatible with old code",
old code would need IMPLICIT NOTYPE
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
|