On May 16, 2012, at 11:48 AM, Satish Balay wrote: > On Wed, 16 May 2012, Satish Balay wrote: > >> On Wed, 16 May 2012, Blaise Bourdin wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am trying to have a look at the fortran modules code. >>> - the petsc and petscdef modules are defined in src/ts/f90-mod/petsctsmod.F >>> would it make more sense to move them to src/f90-mod/petscmod.F >> >> The progression was as follows: >> >> - every petsc object [in the object hierarchy] has its own module - >> i.e petscts is in src/ts/f90-mod/petsctsmod.F >> >> - and each module shoud be built in the correct order of >> hierarchy. [i.e 'petscts' is built after 'petscsnes'] >> >> - we decided to have 'petsc' and 'petscdef' to be the over-arching >> module for all petsc modules - hence they are in >> src/ts/f90-mod/petsctsmod.F. >> >> So src/f90-mod/petscmod.F is an appropriate place for 'petscsys.mod' >> but not 'petsc.mod'. If we have to move it out of ts - then it would >> probably be some new dir like: >> src/overarching-super-petsc/f90-mod/petsctsmod.F or some more suitable >> name. > > sorry - I misread 'src/f90-mod/petscmod.F' as 'src/sys/f90-mod/petscmod.F' > > So - yes - perhaps thats a suitable location. I remember loosing my mind once trying to find the petsc module. I'll move it to $PETSC_DIR/stc/f90-mod, unless somebody screams.
> > Satish > >> >> >>> - Is there a valid reason for not including petscdef.h in the module petsc? >> >> Hm - because its a supermodule that makes sure all petsc component >> modules are getting used? So each component module already had the >> necessary stuff? BTW: the def.h files [like petscdef.h] just have >> preprocessing info - so it doesn't get instantiated into the >> module. >> [All of this #define stuff needs to be transformed into a >> format that can be instantiated in a module eventually] I tried once, but I lost my mind trying to follow the way files are nested, and trying to get to a solution that preserves all possible way to interface with fortran. >> >>> - I would like to create the fortran datatype for PetscBag (Barry: yes, I >>> have a fortran fetish), but I am not completely sure where to start. In >>> particular, how are the .h / .h90 in include/finclude/f90-auto created? >> >> bfort should be creating these during fortranstub generation [either >> during configure step - or with 'make allfortranstubs']. If the c-code >> has a formatted comment that tells bfort to auto-generate fortran stub >> - it might also generate the 'interface' function and stash it in >> include/finclude/f90-auto. That's where I get confused. Take src/sys/bag/bag.c : PetscBagCreate fortran binding is created automatically in ftn-auto, yet there is no include/finclude/ftn-auto/petscbag.h90 What am I missing? Blaise -- Department of Mathematics and Center for Computation & Technology Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA Tel. +1 (225) 578 1612, Fax +1 (225) 578 4276 http://www.math.lsu.edu/~bourdin
