[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Unable to build math/blas
On 07/06/17 15:24, Dr. Thomas Orgis wrote:
>> From reading about the differences between g95 and gfortran, it looks
>> like gfortran is even less likely to support >=fortran95, but I'll try
>> setting PKGSRC_FORTRAN=gfortran and see if there's a difference.
> Where are you reading?! Gfortran is what you build modern Fortran with
> if you don't use a proprietary vendor compiler (not sure how
> Open64 fares these days). It does F95 and also most of F2003, F2008.
> Last I checked, g95 is not actively developed anymore.
I just googled "g95 gfortran differences" and first result I read was
a google groups archive where someone asked exactly what I was
wondering. The answer specifically mentioned that gfortran was much
better at optimization, but not post-f77 features.
Though the post was pretty old, so I probably should have looked up
something more recent. Because I so rarely encounter Fortran, I have
gotten the wrong impression that it's pretty stagnant. I'm realizing
now that's not at all the case.
> Flang may be interesting for clang users, but the default for a
> GCC-based system surely should be gfortran nowadays.
Hmm.. This has been brought up several times before:
pkgsrc apparently defaults to g95 for reasons of portability. Is
this still true? (If g95 isn't actively maintained, maybe people put
efforts into increasing portability of gfortran?).
Main Index |
Thread Index |