On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Brian Dobbins wrote:
^^^
> >From one Fortran averse person to another:
Brian, your date setting appears to be a month behind everyone else.
Cheers,
--
Martin Wheeler - 00 44 1458 83-1103Glastonbury - BA6 9PH - England
(First introduced to FORTRAN by
The gross 32-bit layout, from bottom to top is: program & data, shared libs &
mmap, heap, and stack; with the space between the code/data and shared libs
controlled by brk(2).
let me offer a brief program and a few more details (not in disagreement):
#include
#include
char static_variable;
i
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 12:01:34PM -0400, Robert G. Brown wrote:
> I am (as you may well know) extremely fortran averse. However, a
> researcher in our department has recently asked what the current limits
> are on the size of an array in modern fortran(s) under linux. I suppose
> he'd like an an
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 05:57:55PM -0400, Robert G. Brown wrote:
> >I don't see much point in having both languages in the same source
> >file.
>
> Me neither, actually. Although there might be some point in developing
> a new language that smoothly merges the desireable features of both.
Yes,
From: "Brian Dobbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Beowulf] Quick question... on Fortran
To: "Robert G. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Using the PGI compilers ...
> The way to do this is to use the 'mcmodel=medium' option and to promote
> int
On Thu, 10 May 2007, Greg Lindahl wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 04:37:58PM -0400, Robert G. Brown wrote:
Who knows, in ten years we may see a merge of fortran and c into a
"supercompiler" that permits near transparent switching of syntax, or
inlining of fortran in c the way assembler can be i
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 04:37:58PM -0400, Robert G. Brown wrote:
> Who knows, in ten years we may see a merge of fortran and c into a
> "supercompiler" that permits near transparent switching of syntax, or
> inlining of fortran in c the way assembler can be inlined now.
Existing compilers do inli
On Thu, 10 May 2007, Toon Moene wrote:
Robert G. Brown wrote:
I am (as you may well know) extremely fortran averse. However, a
researcher in our department has recently asked what the current limits
are on the size of an array in modern fortran(s) under linux. I suppose
he'd like an answer f
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Brian Dobbins wrote:
From one Fortran averse person to another:
Using the PGI compilers (at least as of 6.0, but 7.0 is out now and does
the same), you can allocate at -least- up to 32GB in an array with Fortran
on 64-bit systems. I say at least because I don't currently
>From one Fortran averse person to another:
Using the PGI compilers (at least as of 6.0, but 7.0 is out now and does
the same), you can allocate at -least- up to 32GB in an array with Fortran
on 64-bit systems. I say at least because I don't currently have more
than 32GB on any of my nodes. :)
> I am (as you may well know) extremely fortran averse.
and Hell freezes over... Georg Bush gets an IQ above 100...
Hilary Clinton suddenly becomes nice... Pamela Anderson starts
dating a non-rock star...
Too many things happening too quickly. Ahh!
___
I am (as you may well know) extremely fortran averse. However, a
researcher in our department has recently asked what the current limits
are on the size of an array in modern fortran(s) under linux. I suppose
he'd like an answer for both 32 and 64 bit systems. From what I have
been able to goog
12 matches
Mail list logo
