Don

If you know where to find one, I'd really appreciate it.

Have a look at books 4, 5, 6 and 8 on this list for books specifically about Fortran 95.

The other books are mostly Fortran 77, which are also worth having for reference.

http://www.linuxlinks.com/article/20140 … Part2.html

Example of non-advancing IO:

character(len=20) :: name
write(*, 10, advance='no') 'Enter your name: '
read(*, 10) name
write(*, 10, advance='no') 'Hello '
write(*, 10, advance= 'no') name
write(*, 10) ", how are you?"
10 Format (A)

   85 Format (11x,i4,1x,2f8.0,f7.2,f8.3,f11.2,f10.2,f8.3,ADVANCE="NO")

and I get Error: Positive width required in format specifier D at (1).   Any suggestions????

Don

And on to another question: (quit sighing, Jeff)  In Fortran IV, you could put a backslash (\) at the end of a format statement to tell the printer not to issue a carriage return/line feed.  In other words, don't advance the printer.  gFortran doesn't like this.  I was told that you could enter 'advance=no' in place of the backslash to kill the CR/LF.  Unfortunately, all it does is print "advance=no" followed by a CR/LF.  Is there an equivalent to the backslash? 

Also, is there a good, general purpose Programmer's Guide that covers the basic fortran commands - not compiler options, etc. that would be helpful to me? 

Don

Don

Have you tried initialising variables right at the start of the program - even those which should not need initialising yet?
I don't know if doing so would have this effect but my thought is that, as SIGSEGV faults appear to be something to do with accidentally trying to use memory which the executable does not own, this might force the compiler to allocate memory to variables from the very outset?
---
John

If you're comfortable with doing so, you can email the source code to me, and I can have a look/try to run it on my end.  I can't explain why you're seeing the SIGSEGV from your description.

With respect to DFLIB and KERNEL32, both are unlikely to make an appearance in Simply Fortran.  DFLIB is pretty big, there would at least be a chance to port it.  However, it is rather unlikely, especially because many of its more commonly used features are superseded by Fortran 2003 and 2008 intrinsics.  KERNEL32 was part of Digital's/Compaq's/HP's port of the Windows API directly to Fortran.  It is only one of a set of libraries (along with USER32, GDI32, COMCTL32...) that are part of the port.  Approximatrix has no plans to provide access to the Windows API from Fortran directly, especially because it gets a bit messy if you try to do so in a standards-compliant manner (Digital/Compaq/HP took some liberties with how Windows pointers are sized and assumed 32-bit, for example).

I guess what's bothering me the most is the fact that this program compiled and ran under the old Compaq Fortran.  That also brings up another question -- is there an equivalent to Compaq's DFLIB and KERNAL32 packages? They had some good file handling routines.

Just some random thoughts.  I'm sure you'll have considered far more than these already . . ...

Are the error conditions which might arise capable of being found by explicit tests for each one (such as non-existent files, files already in use, and so forth)?  You could then omit the "ierr=0" part of the offending statement.

Alternatively, is there anything strange lurking at the end of any previous lines, possibly off-screen to the right, which might be triggering the trip, quite misleadingly, on the "ierr=0" line?
---
J.

Don