[mpich-discuss] Is it okay to remove F77 support?

[Jeffrey Layton]

I stand corrected. Please, by all means, do what you like and drop F77 or
whatever you want.

Jeff


<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 3:35 PM Jeff Hammond via discuss <discuss at mpich.org>
wrote:

> Everybody wishing to have a serious opinion on ISO Fortran 77 should read
> the following:
>
>
> https://stevelionel.com/drfortran/2020/05/16/doctor-fortran-in-military-strength/
>
> Also, Squyres is right about everything, as usual.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:09 AM Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via discuss <
> discuss at mpich.org> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 27, 2021, at 9:45 AM, Raffenetti, Kenneth J. via discuss <
>> discuss at mpich.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > The MPICH team is asking if it would be OK to drop support for building
>> MPICH with an F77 only compiler.
>>
>> MPI -- MPICH, Open MPI, etc. -- has never been able to be built with a
>> F77-only compiler because the MPI standard has never adhered to the Fortran
>> 77 standard.
>>
>> Additionally, MPI-3.1 17.1.1 quite clearly states that a conformant
>> MPI-3.1 implementation must support either the mpi_f08 module (which
>> implies support for much of the Fortran'08 standard) and/or mpif.h + the
>> mpi module (which requires elements of the Fortran 90 standard).  This
>> requirement has been there since MPI-3.0, published in 2012.
>>
>> Hence, it has not been possible to build any conformant MPI
>> implementation with a "F77-only" compiler for nearly a decade.
>>
>> And let's not forget that Fortran 77 limits symbols -- variables,
>> subroutines, and functions -- to 6 characters.  Hence, it has *never* been
>> possible to build any MPI implementation or application with a Fortran
>> 77-only compiler.
>>
>> Håkon's answer earlier in the thread was also quite correct: "fixed form
>> Fortran" is not the same thing as "Fortran 77".  Please stop conflating the
>> two.
>>
>> > MPICH will still support all standard Fortran language bindings:
>> mpif.h, use mpi, and use mpi_f08. Does the code you speak of not build with
>> modern Fortran compilers? If so, that is the kind of feedback we are
>> looking for.
>>
>> That is a good question, much better formed than the original.  It's a
>> question that the entire MPI Forum would benefit hearing answers to!
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Squyres
>> jsquyres at cisco.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
> --
> Jeff Hammond
> jeff.science at gmail.com
> http://jeffhammond.github.io/
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpich.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20210127/cabf11f3/attachment.html>