Re: Interfaces.Fortran

[dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)]

Well sure, it would be neater to say pragma Interface (Fortran, and we will
certainly put that in soon, but it probably has the same effect as
pragma Interface (C, so it's an elegance issue, not a functoinality issue).

Now of course pragma Convention (Fortran, arr), where arr is a multi
dimensional array is more significant, because that causes proper column
wise storage. We don't have that in GNAT et, but definitely plan to
implement it.

Finally pragma export is indeed useful, and is definitely high on our
priority list. The valuable feature is the ability to specify link names.
Right now, all library entities in GNAT are by default exported with their
default names (all lower case with periods replaced by __ (double underline).

From C you can of course use these names directly, not very elegant, but
it certainly works (we use this extensively in GNAT, writing typically)

#define Enter_Name sem_util__enter_name

so that we can from then on use the "proper" name in the C code, but it
would certainly be nicer to be able to give a clean link name, and we
definitely have plans to implement this!

Note that the version of GNAT about to be released *does* finally have
pragma Import for variables, which will be useful.

So I don't know quite what you were asking me if I was sure about, but I
hope the above answers your questions.