Ross Ridge wrote: > Danny Smith writes: >> Unless you are planning to use a gfortran dll in a VisualBasic app, I >> can see little reason to change from the default "C" calling convention > > FX Coudert writes: >> That precise reason is, as far as I understand, important for some >> people. Fortran code is used for internal routines, built into shared >> libraries that are later plugged into commercial apps. > > > Well, perhaps things are different in Fortran, but the big problem > with using -mrtd in C/C++ is that it changes the default calling > convention for all functions, not just those that are ment to be > exported. While most of MinGW's of headers declare the calling > convention of functions explictily, not all of them do. I think the problem is even bigger in Fortran as the language defines a lot of intrinsic functions, which are implemented in a library (libgfortran).
> >How hard do you think it would be to implement a -mrtd-naming option > >(or another name) to go with -mrtd and add name decorations > > Any library that needs to be able to be called from VisualBasic 6 or some > other "stdcall only" environment should explictly declare it's exported > functions with the stdcall calling convention. Thus, if I understood you correctly, you recommend that we add, e.g., pragma support to gfortran with a pragma which adds the __attribute__((stdcall)) to the tree? Tobias
