[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Printing Fortran muti-dimensional array elements
From: |
Andrew Gaylard |
Subject: |
Re: Printing Fortran muti-dimensional array elements |
Date: |
Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:47:06 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031114 |
Claude N Williams wrote:
Our center is migrating from SUN workstations to Linux RedHat Enterprise
(RHE) servers. Our current RHE (i386-redhat-linux) version contains:
GDB 6.1
G77 3.2.3
DDD 3.3.1
We have the problem of being an R&D shop using 4 and 5 dimension arrays.
We are having the problem that I have found (since 1999) up to 2002
about the dimension size swapping and confusion when trying to examine
an array element. For instance:
Defining an array(21,101,13) and attempting to examine the (2,1,13)
element dies with a segmentation fault!
I realize, through the mail lists, this is (was?) due to the translation
to C before compilation in G77 and how the gtabs are (were?) handled by
GDB. But I have not seen anything recent.....
Has this problem been fixed? Can we just update the apps. to the current
releases and the problem is fixed?
If not, is there a work-around? Other than emulating a one dimensional
array and typing out the arithmetic calculation of the offset of the
element?
If not, will any of the future releases of any of the apps. above fix
this problem (or Gfortran)?
Please point me in the right direction - I am the point man for about 20
scientific programmers and I want them to have a good experience with
Linux!
Thanks,
Claude Williams
Research Scientist
National Climatic Data Center
Asheville, NC.
Hi there Claude,
The best release is 3.3.9, but I doubt that it fixes your problem.
Nonetheless, I can recommend upgrading anyway, since problems on older
releases won't be fixed. It's just the way we work.
Then, having upgraded to 3.3.9 or .10, produce a small testcase consisting
of Fortran source and ddd/gdb commands, and then we can dig into the
problem further.
Cheers,
Andrew.