Malcolm Cohen wrote:
> Hi Anton,
>
> No it is not conforming.
>
> (1) Line 36 has an array constructor whose ac-values have different type
> parameter values. When you have ac-values with different type parameter
> values, you need to have a type-spec to specify what type parameter values
> the array constructor should have. In this case inserting "CHARACTER(11)::"
> would seem to be in order.
>
> (2) At lines 40-42 the actual argument is T1 (or an extension thereof) with
> MASS_KIND equal to KIND(0d0). However, the procedure expects T1 (or an
> extension thereof) with MASS_KIND equal to KIND(0.0).
>
Surely KIND(0.0) is just the default value of the parameter MASS_KIND.
The array TOAD is of type T3 with MASS_KIND value KIND(1.0d0) which
makes TOAD%T1 of type T1 with MASS_KIND value KIND(1.0d0).
John.
|