On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:20 PM, David Bateman<dbate...@dbateman.org> wrote: > Alexander Barth wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Alexander >> Barth<barth.alexan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I have compiled octave with the option enable-64 (and compiled LAPACK, >>> BLAS and SuiteSparse to use 64-bit indexes). I would like to make the >>> octave-forge package arpack to work with this option. As BLAS, I have >>> compiled the Fortran ARPACK library with the option >>> -fdefault-integer-8 (and -fPIC). >>> I have no error during the compilation, but a simple test: >>> eigs(eye(5,5),2) craches octaves (see backtrace below). >>> >>> I'm using octave 3.0.5, gcc 4.2.4 on Ubuntu 8.04 (64-bit), arpack-1.0.7. >>> >>> Any help or insight how to debug this problem would be greatly >>> appreciated. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Alex >>> >> >> >> I think I found the error. If one uses the -fdefault-integer-8 option, >> also LOGICALs are 8-bytes long >> (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Fortran-Dialect-Options.html). >> In eigs-base.cc, the logical parameters that are passed to ARPACK are >> only int's. I declared a macro octave_f77_bool_type which is simply >> octave_idx_type (which becomes 64 bit with --enable-64). If other >> fortran compiler work differently, it would be easier to modify the >> code. >> >> If people are fine with the attached patch, I can apply it to >> octave-forge. >> >> Cheers, >> Alex >> > > eigs is in the octave core now that ARPACK is GPLed... That's great news! I take the discussion to the maintainers list then.
> Why not just use > octave_idx_type if the fortran logical index is 8bit with --enable-64? > This is in the end what I did, but I declared a macro octave_f77_bool_type defined as octave_idx_type. The underlying assumption is that the Fortran compiler uses the same amount of bytes for INTEGER and LOGICAL. I would prefer to "hide" this assumption behind a macro since there might be some Fortran compilers that handle things differently. (After all, it is quite wasteful to allocate 8 bytes for a variable with only two states). I looked a bit around how the different Fortran compilers handle the size of LOGICALs. For gfortran (with and without -fdefault-integer-8) and ifort (with and without -i8), the size of LOGICALs will always be the size of INTEGER. However, with pgf90, the compiler option -i8, leaves the size of LOGICALs to 4 bytes. Only the option -i8storage allocates 8 bytes for INTEGER and LOGICAL. This reminds me also a bit of the assumption that size of a pointer will always be the same as the size of an int in C. Such assumption is the classical problem when porting a program to 64-bit CPU. Cheers, Alex ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the latest innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization. Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
