On 4. juli 2012, at 02:23, Sturla Molden wrote: > Den 03.07.2012 20:38, skrev Casey W. Stark: >> >> Sturla, this is valid Fortran, but I agree it might just be a bad >> idea. The Fortran 90/95 Explained book mentions this in the >> allocatable dummy arguments section and has an example using an array >> with allocatable, intent(out) in a subrountine. You can also see this >> in the PDF linked from >> http://fortranwiki.org/fortran/show/Allocatable+enhancements. > > Ok, so it's valid Fortran 2003. I never came any longer than to Fortran > 95 :-) Make sure any Fortran code using this have the extension .f03 -- > not .f95 or .f90 -- or it might crash horribly. >
To be pedantic: to my knowledge, the common convention is .f for fixed and .f for free form source code. As is stated in the link, "..the Fortran standard itself does not define any extension..." http://fortranwiki.org/fortran/show/File+extensions As one example, ifort doesn't even want to read files with the .f95 suffix. You'll have to pass it a flag stating that "yep, that's a fortran file all right". I use the .f90 suffix everywhere, but maybe that's just me. Paul _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
