Fortran - translating method calls to Fortran 95

Author

translating method calls to Fortran 95

beliavsky@aol.com

2005-04-06, 12:21 pm

I am trying to translate some Python code I have written to Fortran in
a semi-automatic way (some polishing will be required). Code in Python
and other OO languages has lines such as

xx.set(nobs=10,nvar=3)
xx.show()
y = xx.func(a,b)

that I would translate in F95 to

call set(xx,nobs,nvar)
call show(xx)
y = func(xx,a,b)

Do these idioms make sense? I will need to translate the code for the
method calls to the appropriate functions and subroutines, of course.

I suppose the Fortran 2003 equivalents of the first two lines using
type-bound procedures would be

call xx%set(nobs,nvar)
call xx%show()

Gary L. Scott

2005-04-06, 12:21 pm

beliavsky@aol.com wrote:

> I am trying to translate some Python code I have written to Fortran in
> a semi-automatic way (some polishing will be required). Code in Python
> and other OO languages has lines such as
>
> xx.set(nobs=10,nvar=3)
> xx.show()
> y = xx.func(a,b)

Why is above syntax better than below? In what way is the function
"bound" to the type?

>
> that I would translate in F95 to
>
> call set(xx,nobs,nvar)
> call show(xx)
> y = func(xx,a,b)
>
> Do these idioms make sense? I will need to translate the code for the
> method calls to the appropriate functions and subroutines, of course.
>
> I suppose the Fortran 2003 equivalents of the first two lines using
> type-bound procedures would be
>
> call xx%set(nobs,nvar)
> call xx%show()
>

--

Gary Scott
mailto:garyscott@ev1.net

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

Why are there two? God only knows.

If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?

Sponsored Links