Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Is it possible to transform source-files to free-form? #639

Closed
MehdiChinoune opened this issue Dec 2, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

Is it possible to transform source-files to free-form? #639

MehdiChinoune opened this issue Dec 2, 2021 · 5 comments

Comments

@MehdiChinoune
Copy link

Fortran supported free-form since Fortran90 (~1992), which is easier to read. All the compilers out there support it.

Could I open a PR to transform the source file into free-form (with *.f90 extension)?

@langou
Copy link
Contributor

langou commented Dec 6, 2021

Hi Mehdi, Thanks for offering to contribute. I am personally worried and not excited about this suggested massive file conversion. My preference is to not do it. I understand the merit of improved readability. converting to free form is a regular topic of conversation that we have, so thanks for opening this up again. I am happy to hear cons and pros. My current opinion is that we should abstain from doing this massive reformatting. Julien.

@MehdiChinoune
Copy link
Author

I hope someday, LAPACK will start using Modern Fortran, instead of presenting Fortran as a language made for Punch Cards.
LAPACK is a highly-used project and being written in FORTRAN77 give a bad image about Fortran. The worse thing is that LAPACK itself doesn't support Modern Fortran by not updating LAPACK95 against the latest LAPACK.
I know people here don't care about Fortran Language (some hate it and wish it to die).

@ilayn
Copy link
Contributor

ilayn commented Dec 6, 2021

Well, that's a lot of assumptions but new Fortran doesn't bring necessarily new stuff if you are just compiling the same codebase. I think what you implicitly wish to have is the codebase to switch to new Fortran standards like Python2 -> Python3 is that correct?

Note that most of this codebase is "reference" implementation. Many backends modify parts of this code for further optimizations and probably distribute it by compiling with a new compiler. So it seems to me that you are placing your dissatisfaction in the wrong place.

@MehdiChinoune
Copy link
Author

As I have expected, hopeless discussion.

@jeffhammond
Copy link
Contributor

@MehdiChinoune You can just fork LAPACK, make all the changes you want, and then hope people use it. If it's better, they will. This is not a platitude, as I have personally been involved in a project that did this (technically, it was a clean-sheet reimplementation, but that's not important here).

If you are going to make LAPACK use modern Fortran, why not start with a module interface? That is a much stronger incentive for users than fixed->free source form, which is invisible except to developers. Intel MKL ships LAPACK95, which does something like this, but it has the wrong license for broad adoption.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants