- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
The automatic reallocation of array feature is not turned on by default of compiler 16.0. Now I'm using 19.0 and the automatic reallocation is giving me trouble. How do I turn it off?
Link Copied
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
-[no]standard-realloc-lhs
explicitly sets assume keyword realloc_lhs to conform to the
standard, or to override the default. Sets -assume [no]realloc_lhs
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
What kind of trouble is it causing? Having it enabled (thus conforming to the standard) should have no effect on a correct program.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
For compiler 16.0, when I allocate an array of size 1 and set it equal to an array of size larger than one, it will just grab the first element. Now in 19.0, it will tell me error saying array size don't match.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
So you should be glad that the more modern compiler is detecting your programming error.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
I really don't want to rewrite 20000 lines of code.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
if you just want to hack the code for a one-time project, understandable. If that is a code you want to maintain for the upcoming years, it is for sure worth to refactor it and write it as valid Fortran.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
You can't guarantee that it will use the size of one side of assignment or the other, if you turn off automatic reallocation. Maybe it works the way you want it now, but a compiler change might cause it to use the size of the larger array. Indeed it may already be doing that and you haven't noticed yet.
Your code is fundamentally broken. Please fix it before you encounter problems.
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page