On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 10:29:05AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > Wondering -- what does this do differently than cfortran? Note, I'm > *not* trying to imply that because cfortran is already in Debian, this > is redundant. Just asking out of curiosity in the hope I learn > something :-)
[...] To be honest, I can't really say: for me it has been a job requirement, and all together it has worked rather well. It has a way to deal with almost any weird function passing and value return convention, as it requires you to use its own macros for all function declarations, passed parameters and return types you export from C to Fortran. This is the chapter on calling C from Fortran: http://www.starlink.rl.ac.uk/star/docs/sun209.htx/node18.html You may want to have a cursory look to the documentation, which I have to say is rather well done and not too long: I've been comfortable with it: http://www.starlink.rl.ac.uk/star/docs/sun209.htx/sun209.html I don't think it mentions COMPLEX: at least I didn't see it mentioned in the list of available macros: http://www.starlink.rl.ac.uk/star/docs/sun209.htx/node65.html and grepping the header file I actually get a definitive answer: /* Define macros for all the Fortran data types (except COMPLEX, * which is not handled by this package). */ I don't know if/how it handles gfortran, though, as gfortran is quite recent and CNF is quite old. But after a cursory look at the documentation (mainly at the way you define function arguments), the header is very straightforward to read. Ciao, Enrico -- GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
