- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Puzzling problem: the build process would not realize it had to compile file "types" before "gdata". If I compiled "types" by right-click, everything else went fine.
Finally figured out the contrusion. Whatever scans the sources and finds dependencies did not like:
use Constants;use Types
----------
But if you change it to:
use Constants
use Types
.. then it figures out "types" needs to be compiled before this source.
... BTW the older VS6 and older Fortran had a menu item something lile "Set dependency...". Did that go away for a good reason? :)
Finally figured out the contrusion. Whatever scans the sources and finds dependencies did not like:
use Constants;use Types
----------
But if you change it to:
use Constants
use Types
.. then it figures out "types" needs to be compiled before this source.
... BTW the older VS6 and older Fortran had a menu item something lile "Set dependency...". Did that go away for a good reason? :)
Link Copied
3 Replies
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Please submit a test case and problem description to Intel Premier Support. The option from CVF went away because we're now using our own dependence analyzer and not Microsoft's which was very flaky.
I tried creating my own test case based on your description and it worked fine for me.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Apoligies, Steve-- it looked like that was the problem, but then I saw there was a missing manually set up dependency between two projects. Once I clicked on the right check box the problem went away.
But that reminds me of another glitch that 's been there since CVF days:
If a declaration line ends in a comma:
Integer, allocatable :: Biggy( :, : ),
Then all the klaxons go off and the compiler quits scanning.
Which is weird, as it continues on from much bigger syntactical goofups.
There's just something about a trailing comma that deep-sixes a compile run.
Maybe you could just ignore the comma and keep on truckin' ??
But that reminds me of another glitch that 's been there since CVF days:
If a declaration line ends in a comma:
Integer, allocatable :: Biggy( :, : ),
Then all the klaxons go off and the compiler quits scanning.
Which is weird, as it continues on from much bigger syntactical goofups.
There's just something about a trailing comma that deep-sixes a compile run.
Maybe you could just ignore the comma and keep on truckin' ??
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
That is very interesting. Thanks - I'll pass that on.

Reply
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page