 |
 |
The state of play for standard conformance for the currently available compilers can be found in our compiler table in Fortran Forum, and then on our Fortranplus web site. http://www.fortranplus.co.uk/resources/fortran_2003_2008_compiler_support.pd f Jane and I had no idea the table would have this lifespan. Cray supports 2003 and 2008. IBM supports 2003. The rest is a mish mash. Jane and I will be sending out requests for updates for the August edition of Fortran Forum shortly. Cheers Ian Chivers -----Original Message----- From: Fortran 90 List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Harper Sent: 04 March 2014 00:43 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Assigning pointer components to individual elements of array? On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Tom Clune wrote: > Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 16:40:31 -0500 > From: Tom Clune <[log in to unmask]> > Reply-To: Fortran 90 List <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Assigning pointer components to individual elements of array? > > > On Mar 3, 2014, at 3:10 PM, "Lionel, Steve" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> I'm not really sure why I saw that I needed -standard-semantics to get the code to work - it didn't look to me like a case where we require that. I'll poke at it some more. >> >> I see it now. In the assignment: >> >> array = [Foo(1)] >> >> we require that option to get the automatic (re)allocation of "array", since this is intrinsic assignment. I had been staring at the defined assignment in the next statement but that's not the issue. > > Ah - I should have thought of that. I've been using the more explicit flag "-assume realloc_lhs". > > BTW, is there any chance that this will become the default at some > point? I still have some clients that fight me on this, and it > undermines my arguments when the default settings do the "wrong" thing. > The flag you suggest should help some since it emphasizes the standard. > > Cheers, > > - Tom But which standard? The Intel Fortran XE 13.1 documentation under Language Standards Conformance says it supports all of f95, most of f2003 and some of f2008, but I haven't been able to find a list of the missing f2003 features. That may of course be my fault. On the other hand the documentation of XE 13.1 standard-semantics says it enables all of the options that implement the current Fortran Standard behavior of the compiler, which is Fortran 2003 with some Fortran 2008 features. That would seem to imply that all of f2003 is supported. I am confused by this discrepancy between 2 places in the Intel documnetation for the same version of the same compiler. -- John Harper, School of Mathematics Statistics and Operations Research Victoria University, PO Box 600, Wellington 6140, New Zealand e-mail [log in to unmask] phone (+64)(4)463 5276 fax (+64)(4)463 5045