kschrader wrote:Jeff -
I don't think it's necessary to try and help me with my programming. I did get a nice response off-line from John and sent him something to illustrate my problems. Funny thing is that when trimming things down to give him the essence of my problems, it worked! No compilation errors. Doh! I can't explain it.
Kurt,
I wasn't trying to suggest you needed help with your programming; rather, I was more afraid you had encountered a bug. Sometimes there is a subtle issue that I might not have explained properly.
kschrader wrote:Or maybe I can. I decided to force all lines to begin in column 7. Once I did that, I ended up with no compilation errors. Fine with me, I like to have things very structured. That's the way I learned...start in column 7. Nice thing is, all of the standard actions (Read, Write, Do, etc.) turn pink when starting in column 7. Visually, that helps to organize things.
Simply Fortran and GNU Fortran will always assume a file ending in .for or .f is a "fixed-format" FORTRAN source file, requiring statements to start in the seventh column. The enforcement of this rule is probably far more strict than Compaq Visual Fortran.
kschrader wrote:One thing that still doesn't make sense...on some lines where it's a continuation, I put an "&" in column 6 and continue my coding. But that line turns green, indicating it's a comment?? But once compiled and run, the continuation of the line prints at the top of my file correctly. So, the green is not a comment??? Confusing.
This behavior is definitely a bug in the syntax highlighting engine. I'll have a look at it. Good catch!
kschrader wrote:Now I'm in kind of a pickle. One bright individual here at work figured out how to get the old Visual Fortran to compile on a 64-bit machine with Win7. Kind of a kludge but it does run and after some checking, gives the same output as before.
The benefit of working with Simply Fortran is that the package and the compiler continue to be supported. Furthermore, GNU Fortran has advanced far beyond CVF in terms of supported standards. GNU Fortran implements much of Fortran 2003 and some of Fortran 2008, whereas CVF remains at Fortran 95. However, I can certainly understand sticking with CVF if it continues to suit your needs.
kschrader wrote:So, I don't know if I should continue to investigate SF. I wonder what other kind of "issues" I might find. One thing that I found is that in my code I had used logical unit 6 as an input file...that didn't seem to bother Visual Fortran. But in SF, the program is using that as the "standard" output file and overwrote my inputs. I remember from the old days that LU 5 and 6 were reserved...but as I said, Visual Fortran let me use them however I wanted.
GNU Fortran is, again, probably far more strict about units 5 and 6 than CVF was. The GNU Fortran developers tend to be sticklers for standards.
I do hope you'll continue to explore Simply Fortran. I am trying to help, but I understand that Simply Fortran's workflow is often different than what people expect. You should be able to start a project fresh by selecting "Command-Line Program" from the "Select New Project" window and add your files to the resulting project. The "Hello World" example was included in an attempt to overcome the initial learning curve, so I'm always interested in new user feedback with regards to starting with the package.
When you talk about more specific instructions, what would you expect to see? I'd like to, of course, provide the most helpful documentation possible for new users. Any suggestions would be welcome.
Jeff Armstrong
Approximatrix, LLC