Hi Alan,
trim is recognized by the gfortran compiler (at least the version
of it
that I have), but not g77 (which I believe is what you still must
use with
MinGW). Our other f77 examples use lnblnk instead of trim and
apparently
you (and anybody else who has tested our f77 examples)
Hi Werner,
what is the reason they do not run? If you do not get any output,
the program simply stops, that could be due to a missing DLL (sometimes
you get a message, sometimes you don't under Windows).
Regards,
Arjen
On 2009-03-24 09:27, Werner Smekal wrote:
Hi Alan,
trim is recognized
Hi,
I'm using the dynamic drivers and it exits with a message like
(translated from German):
The application could not be started, since (null).dll wasn't found.
A new installation of the application might solve the problem.
Some problem converting C to Fortran strings?
Regards,
Werner
On
On 2009-03-24 09:38, Werner Smekal wrote:
Hi,
I'm using the dynamic drivers and it exits with a message like
(translated from German):
The application could not be started, since (null).dll wasn't found. A
new installation of the application might solve the problem.
Some problem
Hi Werner,
the def-file is a file with instructions for the linker, so as far as
CMake is concerned, it has the same function as a source file. I am
not sure why it works for me and not for you (right now, it is not
part of the dependencies - we need to take a look at that).
This requires
Hi Arjen,
On 2009-03-24 09:38, Werner Smekal wrote:
Hi,
I'm using the dynamic drivers and it exits with a message like
(translated from German):
The application could not be started, since (null).dll wasn't
found. A
new installation of the application might solve the problem.
Some
Hi Werner,
very odd! I will delve into this myself :(
Regards,
Arjen
On 2009-03-24 09:51, Werner Smekal wrote:
Hi Arjen,
On 2009-03-24 09:38, Werner Smekal wrote:
Hi,
I'm using the dynamic drivers and it exits with a message like
(translated from German):
The application could not be
On 2009-03-24 09:41+0100 Werner Smekal wrote:
Missed that question. 2 months should be okay (beginning of May) [for next
release date].
I am OK with the beginning of May as well.
To the rest of the core developers here, please let us know immediately if
you have some development going on that
Alan W. Irwin wrote:
On 2009-03-24 09:41+0100 Werner Smekal wrote:
Missed that question. 2 months should be okay (beginning of May) [for next
release date].
I am OK with the beginning of May as well.
To the rest of the core developers here, please let us know immediately if
you have
Alan W. Irwin wrote:
On 2009-03-22 01:55-0400 Hazen Babcock wrote:
Does this seem like a reasonable approach?
Yes.
I won't comment on the driver details since you are considerably more
expert
than me on this topic. However, in general, I think your idea of
substantially reducing and
On Tuesday, March 24, 2009 at 22:49:08 (-0400) Hazen Babcock writes:
Even though no one objected to adding 4 new functions to the dispatch
table, I'm thinking that is probably not the best way after all. Instead
I think the best way to do this is to add some new PLESC cases,
something
Hello all,
Geoffrey Furnish writes:
The main purpose in this post is just to sample the other developers, all
of you who are currently much more actively involved in PLplot than I am,
or even than I expect to be once I regain my stride, so to speak, and just
see if any of you would be
12 matches
Mail list logo
