[MPI3 Fortran] Results of recent J3 Fortran meeting

N.M. Maclaren nmm1 at cam.ac.uk
Thu Oct 21 12:11:49 CDT 2010

On Oct 21 2010, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote:
>>From MPI view-point: 
>We clearly need to get exactly the information
>that would be returned by 
>  - LEN(dummy_arg) ..... in case of CHARACTER*(*) dummy_arg
>  - LEN(dummy_arg(1)) .. in case of CHARACTER*(*) dummy_arg(*)
>  - LEN(dummy_arg(1,1))  in case of CHARACTER*(*) dummy_arg(dim1,*)
>If I understood correctly, then this is CHOICE 3 in the mail below.

You didn't.  That's possible in all three choices.  Take another look
at Malcolm's C code.

On Oct 21 2010, Rasmussen, Craig E wrote:
>> Nitpick: that's "assumed length", "assumed size" is about arrays. I 
>> know this terminology is confusing, with assumed size, shape, length, 
>> rank, type ... but since the paper does both assumed length (for 
>> characters), and also does passing assumed-size arrays to assumed-rank 
>> dummies, we need to get the terms right to avoid even more confusion!
>assumed length => character strings
>assumed size => arrays
>so they aren't both about arrays, correct?

It's not as simple as that once you bring in sequence association.  You
can reasonably regard the length of a character variable as being a
hidden first dimension.  There is no sense in which assumed length
variables correspond with strings in almost any other current language.

Nick Maclaren.

More information about the mpiwg-fortran mailing list