type-bound procedures and type extension 
Author Message
 type-bound procedures and type extension

Now that gfortran 4.4.0 supports type-bound procedures and type
extension, I think the number of compilers supporting these features
is equal to or greater than the number that don't.  Those supporting
it include gfortran, Cray, IBM, and NAG.  Those who don't include
Intel, PGI, Pathscale, and g95.  If any of the developers of the
latter compilers are reading this, can you give some idea of when you
expect to support these features?

Damian



Thu, 03 Mar 2011 03:23:39 GMT  
 type-bound procedures and type extension

Quote:
> Now that gfortran 4.4.0 supports type-bound procedures and type
> extension, I think the number of compilers supporting these features
> is equal to or greater than the number that don't.  Those supporting
> it include gfortran, Cray, IBM, and NAG.  Those who don't include
> Intel, PGI, Pathscale, and g95.  If any of the developers of the
> latter compilers are reading this, can you give some idea of when you
> expect to support these features?

> Damian

Intel will release the ivf v11. However, Intel maybe support type-
bound procedures ... in January of 2009 in their release of ivf 12.
Intel said that oop programing is not important in fortran which is a
big mistake(many user swith to c++ only for the oop capicity in c++,
not other features. It means the users of ivf will lost in the next
year including some of my frieds). Gfortran is now better then ivf.


Thu, 03 Mar 2011 22:32:20 GMT  
 type-bound procedures and type extension

Quote:

> > Now that gfortran 4.4.0 supports type-bound procedures and type
> > extension, I think the number of compilers supporting these features
> > is equal to or greater than the number that don't.  Those supporting
> > it include gfortran, Cray, IBM, and NAG.  Those who don't include
> > Intel, PGI, Pathscale, and g95.  If any of the developers of the
> > latter compilers are reading this, can you give some idea of when you
> > expect to support these features?

> > Damian

Sorry!

... in January of 2009 in their release of ivf 12. =>

... in January of 2010 in their release of ivf 12.



Thu, 03 Mar 2011 22:38:26 GMT  
 type-bound procedures and type extension

Quote:


>>Now that gfortran 4.4.0 supports type-bound procedures and type
>>extension, I think the number of compilers supporting these features
>>is equal to or greater than the number that don't.  Those supporting
>>it include gfortran, Cray, IBM, and NAG.  Those who don't include
>>Intel, PGI, Pathscale, and g95.  If any of the developers of the
>>latter compilers are reading this, can you give some idea of when you
>>expect to support these features?

>>Damian

> Intel will release the ivf v11. However, Intel maybe support type-
> bound procedures ... in January of 2009 in their release of ivf 12.
> Intel said that oop programing is not important in fortran which is a
> big mistake(many user swith to c++ only for the oop capicity in c++,
> not other features. It means the users of ivf will lost in the next
> year including some of my frieds). Gfortran is now better then ivf.

They've not said OO isn't important that I've heard.  I have heard them
say that customers have requested other new features in greater numbers
and so they adjust their priorities as they see a need to meet the needs
of their existing customers.

--

Gary Scott

Fortran Library:  http://www.fortranlib.com

Support the Original G95 Project:  http://www.g95.org
-OR-
Support the GNU GFortran Project:  http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html

If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows
it can't be done.

-- Henry Ford



Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:44:42 GMT  
 type-bound procedures and type extension


Quote:
>Intel will release the ivf v11. However, Intel maybe support type-
>bound procedures ... in January of 2009 in their release of ivf 12.
>Intel said that oop programing is not important in fortran which is a
>big mistake(many user swith to c++ only for the oop capicity in c++,
>not other features. It means the users of ivf will lost in the next
>year including some of my frieds). Gfortran is now better then ivf.

Notwithstanding your date correction, we have not made any statements about a
"version 12" of Intel Fortran, including speculation on a release date. Any
speculation you do on that is yours alone.

Type extension is in version 11, which is available as an open beta and will
be released before the end of this year.  Procedure pointers are also in
version 11, but type-bound procedures and polymorphism are not.  Those last
two are under active development.

We never said "oop programming is not important in Fortran".  We are committed
to implementing the full Fortran 2003 language.
--
Steve Lionel
Developer Products Division
Intel Corporation
Nashua, NH

For email address, replace "invalid" with "com"

User communities for Intel Software Development Products
  http://softwareforums.intel.com/
Intel Fortran Support
  http://support.intel.com/support/performancetools/fortran
My Fortran blog
  http://www.intel.com/software/drfortran



Fri, 04 Mar 2011 20:21:10 GMT  
 type-bound procedures and type extension

Quote:



> >Intel will release the ivf v11. However, Intel maybe support type-
> >bound procedures ... in January of 2009 in their release of ivf 12.
> >Intel said that oop programing is not important in fortran which is a
> >big mistake(many user swith to c++ only for the oop capicity in c++,
> >not other features. It means the users of ivf will lost in the next
> >year including some of my frieds). Gfortran is now better then ivf.

> Notwithstanding your date correction, we have not made any statements about a
> "version 12" of Intel Fortran, including speculation on a release date. Any
> speculation you do on that is yours alone.
...
> We never said "oop programming is not important in Fortran".  We are committed
> to implementing the full Fortran 2003 language.

Yeah, I was very sure of both of those points. Didn't even take knowing
anything in particular about Intel. Those just aren't the kinds of
statements that pretty much any company makes. What discussions I've had
with Intel folk just reinforced that.

I wonder whether it might be language difficulties. In both cases, it
looks like "Simulate" is expressing his own guess or interpretation, but
doing so in words that appear to attribute them to Intel.

--
Richard Maine                    | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain



Sat, 05 Mar 2011 01:06:03 GMT  
 type-bound procedures and type extension
Sorry, Steve Lionel. Note that it is only my guess and I'm sorry to
said those! It seems that the release of a new version by Intel is
about one year,so I said Intel v12 in 2010 (because v11 will be
released before the end of this year).

I did not want to make trouble. Intel complier is a good one -- it is
very fast and easy-to-use.



Sat, 05 Mar 2011 10:13:17 GMT  
 
 [ 7 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. procedure variables vs. type-bound procedures

2. Explicit interface of a type-bound procedure bounded to an instance (F2003)

3. Access types vs. Record types as procedure parameters

4. Procedure types and dynamic binding

5. A Type checking/reconstruction procedure for Typed-Prolog

6. questions about type-bound procedures

7. Passing type-bound procedures as arguments?

8. Type-Extension and Procedure Variables

9. New User Question: extension types and python 2.2/class/type

10. Win32 Extension ADO with SQL Server Problem to insert money data type with a stored procedure

11. Type extension and renamed parent type

12. Passing module procedures to external procedures -- type issues

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software