David Vowles wrote:
> > From my perspective, one of the beauties of Fortran 90 is infact that
> > in the majority of cases it is not necessary to define an explicit
> > interface and thus there is no need to maintain consistent
> > specifications of procedures (public or private) in more than one
> > place. Thus I would be disappointed to see the
> > compulsory separation of implementation and specification
> > (interface).
and Jean Vezina wrote:
> Agreed!
>
> This was the rationale of implementing modules this way in F90.
>
> If we want to choose an alternative method, please propose something
> that will not be too tedious for the programmer.
Separating implementation and specification does not necessarily imply
that programmers need to write interfaces twice. They don't need to
write interfaces twice in the case of generics that are defined in
terms of module procedures -- the interface block refers to the MODULE
PROCEDURE instead of containing an interface body. The same principles
could be applied to separate interface and specification.
Best regards,
Van Snyder
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|