Re: identify floating-point types

[bglbv@my-dejanews.com]

"Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> writes:

> Well, with some languages (notably C and C++), on some machines, there are
> multiple parameter (and memory format) conventions.  But, I have to admit, I
> think, in practice, Fortran conventions tend to be pretty consistent, for
> any one particular architecture.  

Except on Microsoft Windows platforms, where there seem to be as many
conventions as compiler vendors (except perhaps where DLLs are involved).

robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com wroteL
> |In article <7cpk9t$s5o$1@plug.news.pipex.net>,
> |  "Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> |> In practise, you might need to check your Ada and Fortran
> |> compilers' documentation carefully, to see whether the
> |> types provided in Interfaces.Fortran do truly match the
> |> corresponding Fortran types (on some
> |> machines this will be a given thing, but not all).
> |
> |Nick why do you say this? Have you run into an Ada 95
> |compiler where the types did not match? If so, it would
> |be a clear bug!

The types only have to match if the Fortran implementation used is
among those officially supported by the Ada implementation. There is
no requirement in the Ada standard for a compiler to interface
correctly with all conceivable Fortrans on the same platform.
Nick's advice to check the documentation and see if that combination
of compilers is supported is spot on. *If it is supported*, then
the types should of course match.