[mpich-discuss] mpifort wrapper compiler?

Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) jsquyres at cisco.com
Thu Dec 5 10:46:25 CST 2013

On Dec 5, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Pavan Balaji <balaji at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> It’s very unlikely we’ll drop F77 separation.  

Just curious -- why?  Fortran compiler vendors themselves are consolidating down to single executable names: ifort, pgifort, gfortran, ... etc.

This was one of the main motivations for OMPI: we're reflecting what the underlying compiler is, not adding our own distinctions on top of them.  If the underlying compiler distinguishes between free/fixed form via the .suffix, then we (MPI implementations) shouldn't change that.

I guess my question is: why would you use "mpif77" instead of "mpifort"?  Or, put differently, what do you need to compile with mpif77 that would not compile properly with mpifort?

> F90 and F08 separation might not be a big issue, but we’ll likely just maintain them as separate symbolic links to mpifort.  For now, we could add a symbolic link from mpifort to mpif90.
> FWIW, we already use FC and FCFLAGS for F90+.  But we still use F77 for F77 compilers.

Keep in mind that there have not been any "Fortran 77" compilers for over 30 years.

The distinction is artificial and arbitrary...

Jeff Squyres
jsquyres at cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

More information about the discuss mailing list