------- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-30 21:18 ------- > Not all. I gave two counter examples: pvf and ifort.
Well at least ifort 9.1, 10.0 and 10.1 on Linux do not use the f2c calling convention. Neither does NAG f95. But I agree that _ vs __ and different calling convention make things more difficult, which is why I'm glad that we have BIND(C). However, besides the problem you mentioned with unmodifiable libraries there is the additional problem that many compilers do not support BIND(C), yet. > gcc makes a difference between built in types and structs with respect to > function return values (depends on the platform and the > -fpcc-struct-return/-freg-struct-return switches). Ugh, this explains why on PPC(?) the initial VALUE gfortran testsuite test (which used a struct instead of _Complex on the C side) failed; on x86/x86-64 it worked. I thought it was only about alignment. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35765
