On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Travis Austin <austin at txcorp.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > I have been digging into the tutorials directories in PETSc and wanting to > understand how the makefile breaks up fortran > examples into TESTEXAMPLES_FORTRAN and TESTEXAMPLES_F90. (This is follow > on work from the Tech-X Phase > I related to PETSc.) > > There appear to be some F90 examples that are mixed in > TESTEXAMPLES_FORTRAN. For example, in the snes > tutorials, I see this: > > snes/examples/tutorials/makefile:TESTEXAMPLES_FORTRAN = ex1f.PETSc runex1f > ex1f.rm ex40f90.PETSc runex40f90 ex40f90.rm > Its a mistake. > In other places, anything with an f90 in the name is under > TESTEXAMPLES_F90. > > Is there any particular strategy for how files are placed > under TESTEXAMPLES_FORTRAN and TESTEXAMPLES_F90? > > Another related question is that some of the F90 examples have a .F suffix > and others have a .F90 suffix which is of course > related to formatting but my guess is the committer of these files just > following their own preferences. > (See snes/examples/tutorials/ex39f90.F and ex40f90.F90.) > F90 is wrong, another mistake. Matt > Does anyone know if there was a reason that ex39f90 was made *.F and > ex40f90 was make *.F90? I'm trying to parse some > of these examples based on suffixes and different suffixes makes is a bit > more cumbersome. > > Thanks for any help, > Travis > > =============================== > Travis Austin, Ph.D > VP, Computational Mathematics > Tech-X Corporation > 5621 Arapahoe Ave > Boulder, CO 80303 > austin at txcorp.com > =============================== > > > > -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130416/34e861bc/attachment.html>
