Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<viqsp8$16lin$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Gary Scott <garylscott@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: writing a module file in gfortran 14
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 18:40:08 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <viqsp8$16lin$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vio2n4$d19a$1@dont-email.me> <viqd1m$12u2e$1@dont-email.me>
 <viqh24$13p8p$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2024 01:40:08 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="50b275bf41f2f3c9d9c079dbb90eeeb9";
	logging-data="1267287"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+5c49trJppGXie7uKZ68KnWL9FVOQIcDE="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aFa+00HRfFqh8RnIZ2Kua6v1ydE=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <viqh24$13p8p$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2250

On 12/4/2024 3:20 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 12/4/2024 2:11 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>> Is the "implicit none" in the proper place in the following code ?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> You want
>>
>>>        module aaa_modules
>>>
>>>             implicit none
>>>
>>>             INTERFACE
>>>               SUBROUTINE ABCPAR(ISW,IRETST,IR,IC,PAR,IPHASE)
>>                   IMPLICIT NONE
>>
>> ...
>>
>> because declarations in the outer module have no meaning on
>> interfaces.
>>
>> A rather frequent source of confusion, I'm afraid (I got bitten
>> by this myself in the past).
> 
> Woof !  I was afraid of that.  The Fortran Module definition seems to be 
> very fragile.
> 
> That is going to be painful to add to my module file.
> 
> Lynn
> 
The interface is its own entity.  I think the design is correct in 
requiring the implicit none to be repeated.  While I might have 
preferred a "file scope" design more, as long as there is consistency in 
the design, I'm ok with it.

Sorry for the direct email :( intended to post here