Related
This question already has answers here:
Modern Fortran equivalent of an action statement shared by nested DO and GO TO
(1 answer)
Function has no implicit type
(4 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
I am trying to calculate the moment of inertia in fortran. The formula I am using is following: The code I am using:
program moment
implicit none
real :: cR,h,rho0,a,b,c,d,resultV,pi,resultMI,aMass,exactresMI,exactresV,r,res,z,rho
integer :: m,n
! rho0 = density, cR=capital R( radius),h= height )
rho0=10000
cR=0.05
h=0.1
a=0.d0
b=h
c=0.d0
d=cR
m=1000
n=1000
call cheb2(a,b,m,c,d,n,funV,res)
pi=4*datan(1.d0)
resultV=res*2*pi
exactresV= pi/3*cR**2*h
write(*,*)
write(*,*) "Numerical volume result =", resultV
write(*,*) "Exact volume result = ",exactresV
call cheb2(a,b,m,c,d,n,funV,res)
resultMI=res*2*pi
aMass=exactresV*rho0
exactresMI=3/10.*aMass*cR**2
write(*,*)
write(*,*) "Numerical Moment of Inertia result =", resultMI
write(*,*) "Exact Moment of Inertia result = ",exactresMI
end program
function funV(z,r)
if (r.gt.z*cR/h) then
rho=0.d0
else
rho=1.d0
end if
funV=rho*r
return
end
function funMI(z,r)
if (r.gt.z*cR/h) then
rho=rho0
else
rho=1.d0
endif
funMI=rho*r**3
return
end
include "CHEB.FOR"
Our instructor does not use "implicit none" , so I am really new to this operator. Out instructor gave us CHEB.FOR code for calculating 2 dimensional integrals. I am writing it here:
subroutine ch4xy(al,bl,cl,dl,f,ri)
implicit double precision (a-h,o-z)
common/ttxy/ t1,t2
dimension xx(4),yy(4)
c1=(al+bl)/2.d0
c2=(dl+cl)/2.d0
d1=(-al+bl)/2.d0
d2=(dl-cl)/2.d0
xx(1)=c1+d1*t1
xx(2)=c1+d1*t2
yy(1)=c2+d2*t1
yy(2)=c2+d2*t2
xx(3)=c1-d1*t1
xx(4)=c1-d1*t2
yy(3)=c2-d2*t1
yy(4)=c2-d2*t2
ss=0
do 3 i=1,4
do 3 j=1,4
ss=ss+f(xx(i),yy(j))
3 continue
ri=ss*d1*d2/4.d0
return
end
subroutine cheb2(a,b,m,c,d,n,f,r)
implicit double precision (a-h,o-z)
external f
common/ttxy/ t1,t2
t1=0.187592
t2=0.794654
hx=(b-a)/m
hy=(d-c)/n
rr=0
do 5 i=1,m
do 5 j=1,n
aa=a+(i-1)*hx
bb=aa+hx
cc=c+(j-1)*hy
dd=cc+hy
call ch4xy(aa,bb,cc,dd,f,ri)
rr=rr+ri
5 continue
r=rr
return
end
When I compile the file, a couple of errors and a warning appear:
CHEB.FOR:19:17:
19 | do 3 j=1,4
| 1
Warning: Fortran 2018 deleted feature: Shared DO termination label 3 at (1)
CHEB.FOR:36:11:
36 | do 5 j=1,n
| 1
Warning: Fortran 2018 deleted feature: Shared DO termination label 5 at (1)
momentOFinertia.f95:17:27:
17 | call cheb2(a,b,m,c,d,n,funV,res)
| 1
Error: Symbol 'funv' at (1) has no IMPLICIT type
First, I dont understand why funV is unclassifiable statement, it classifies as a function. Second, our instructor used some old operations which is apparently not valid in new fortran. I dont know what could replace "shared do".
The main problem (fixed by your edit)is that your code misses an end or end program at the end. Alternatively, you could put an end program after your functions and contains between the subroutine and the main program body. That would make the functions to be internal subprograms and would fix your other problem - no implicit type for the functions.
This - putting the functions inside the program as internal subprograms, allows the program to "see" them and then the program can correctly pass them to other procedures. Alternatively, you could make an interface block for them or declare their type and let them be external. See Why do I have to specify implicitly for a double precision return value of a function in Fortran? for more.
You also have a type mismatch. The code you got from your instructor uses double precision but your code uses the default real. You have to synchronize that. Update your code to double precision, either using double precision or using real kinds.
The compiler also warns you that your program is using deleted features. These features were deleted in modern revisions of the Fortran standards. However, the compiler remain largely backwards compatible and will compile the code including those features anyway, unless you request strictly a certain standard revision.
In this case two do-loops use one common continue statement
do 5 ...
do 5 ...
5 continue
This is not allowed and can be fixed by inserting another continue with another label or, better, by using end do.
I have been using Fortran for a few months now, but I am self-taught and have only been learning it by reading someone else's codes so my knowledge of Fortran is very limited. I wrote this function which is meant to read a text file containing data and save these data in an array. Since I don't know the size of the data, I choose to allocate the array within the function.
FUNCTION RSEBIN(NAMEIN,NZNSEB)
IMPLICIT DOUBLE PRECISION (A-H, O-Z)
INTEGER DSEBTP, IIND, NZNSEB
CHARACTER(LEN=75) :: FILNAM
CHARACTER NAMEIN*(*)
REAL, ALLOCATABLE :: RSEBIN(:,:)
WRITE (FILNAM,1500) 'Extra_InputFiles/SEB_inputs/SEB_', NAMEIN,
2 '.txt' !Define the path and name of the input data text file
1500 FORMAT (A32,A,A4)
OPEN (UNIT=101, FILE=FILNAM, STATUS='OLD')
READ(101,*) !Skip the header
DSEBTP = 0
DO
READ(101,*,IOSTAT=IO) TRASH
IF (IO.NE.0) EXIT !Exit the loop when last line has been reached
DSEBTP = DSEBTP + 1 !Counts how many time periods inputs are set for the input data type
END DO
REWIND(101) !Rewind text file to read the inputs
ALLOCATE(RSEBIN(DSEBTP,NZNSEB+1)) !Allocate the input data array
READ(101,*) !Skip the header
DO 1510 ISEBTP=1,DSEBTP
READ(101,*) (RSEBIN(ISEBTP,IIND), IIND=1, NZNSEB+1) !Save the data in the main array
1510 CONTINUE
CLOSE (UNIT=101)
RETURN
END FUNCTION
I then use this function in another subroutine with this following statement:
ASEBAT = RSEBIN('AirTemperature',NZNSEB) !Allocate the air temperature array (first column is time)
When I try to run the program, I get a "Insufficient virtual memory" error. After a quick search, I discovered that this error usually occurs when one is allocating huge arrays. However, during my tests, I was only using a 3 X 5 array. After a few more tests, I realized that the function works fine if I declare the dimensions of my array RSEBIN rather than making it allocatable and allocating it in the function. However, this solution is not sustainable for me as I want this function to be able to read text files of various dimensions.
Does anyone have an idea why I have such error? Should I avoid allocating arrays in a function? As I said previously, I am fairly new to Fortran and I am pretty sure my code has many issues, so I apologize for my primitive code writing and would be grateful for any tip.
Also, I should note that I'm using the Intel Fortran Compiler from oneAPI for Windows. I recently switched from the fortran compiler in Intel XE, with which, if I can recall, I was using a similar function without any issue.
Thanks!
This question already has an answer here:
Variable format
(1 answer)
Closed 2 years ago.
I used to the Intel fortran compiler which supports using the <n> extension like
write(*, '(<n>(2I4))') (i, 2*i, i=1,n)
To illustrate, I give a s1_fprint.f90 subroutine as follows
subroutine fprint(name,bb)
IMPLICIT NONE
character(len=*), intent(in) :: name
real, intent(in) :: bb(:,:)
integer :: column=10
integer i,j,k,m,n
n = size(bb,1)
m = size(bb,2)
write(*,'(1a)')name
do k=0,m/column-1
write(*, '(1x,<column>i16)')(i,i=k*column+1,(k+1)*column)
write(*,'(1i10,<column>f)')(i,(bb(i,j),j=k*column+1,(k+1)*column),i=1,n)
write(*,'(/)')
end do
if(mod(m,column)/=0)then
write(*, '(1x,<m-m/column*column>i16)')(i,i=m/column*column+1,m)
write(*,'(1i10,<m-m/column*column>f)')(i,(bb(i,j),j=m/column*column+1,m),i=1,n)
write(*,'(/)')
endif
end subroutine fprint
Now, I change the Intel fortran compiler to gfortran, then I test (t1_useSur.f90)
above subroutine in gfortran as follows:
program main
implicit none
real :: A(2,3) = reshape([1.2, 2.3, 3.4, 4.5, 5.6, 6.7], [2,3])
call fprint('A',A)
end program main
which should show us something like
A
1 2 3
1 1.2000000 3.4000001 5.5999999
2 2.3000000 4.5000000 6.6999998
However, in gfortran compiler when I run
gfortran t1_useSur.f90 s1_fprint.f90 -o out
./out
there are many errors as
.\s1_fprint.f90:14.17:
write(*, '(1x,<column>i16)')(i,i=k*column+1,(k+1)*column)
1
Error: Unexpected element '<' in format string at (1)
.\s1_fprint.f90:15.19:
write(*,'(1i10,<column>f)')(i,(bb(i,j),j=k*column+1,(k+1)*column),i=1,n)
1
Error: Unexpected element '<' in format string at (1)
.\s1_fprint.f90:19.17:
write(*, '(1x,<m-m/column*column>i16)')(i,i=m/column*column+1,m)
1
Error: Unexpected element '<' in format string at (1)
.\s1_fprint.f90:20.19:
write(*,'(1i10,<m-m/column*column>f)')(i,(bb(i,j),j=m/column*column+1,m),i=
1
Error: Unexpected element '<' in format string at (1)
Since the <n> extension is not supported by gfortran, how can fix these problems?
Near dupe Variable format statement when porting from Intel to GNU gfortran
For the 1-dim cases like (i,i=...) :
If you have (or get) a version of gfortran that supports F08, which browsing https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/ appears to be around 4.6.4 up, use * as the count like (1x,*i16)
Otherwise, use the old-as-the-hillsF77 trick: since format repetitions or items 'beyond' the data list are ignored, just use a repetition count that is at least as big as the data will ever be (but not more than HUGE(0)) here (1x,10i16) is actually enough but something like (1x,999i16) makes it much more obvious
or if you like extra work, do on-the-fly like the 2-dim case below
For the 2-dim cases like (i,(bb(i,j),j=...),i=...) which currently use format looping to insert record breaks either:
reduce to 1-dim by making the record breaks into separate WRITEs:
do i=...
write(*,'(1i10,*f)') i,(bb(i,j),j=...)
end do !i
generate the correct count on-the-fly:
character(len=20) fmt
...
write(fmt,'(a,i0,a)') '(1i10,', numcols_expression, 'f)'
write(*, trim(fmt)) (i,(bb(i,j),j=...),i=...)
... or ...
write(fmt,'(i0)') numcols_expression
write(*, '(1i10,'//trim(fmt)//'f)') (i,bb(i,j),j=...),i=...)
PS: you don't actually need 1i10 just i10, but I left it for consistency. Also rather than a loop for the full chunks then an if for the partial chunk, which have to be kept in sync, I would probably do:
do k=1,m,column
l=min(k+column-1,m)
... print chunk for i=k,l (numcols is l-k+1) ...
end do !k
I'm having a problem with a fortran 77 project (Yes i know it's archaic, but my prof requres us to program in fixed form fortran)
So I'm having a problem with a subroutine, which should read an N dimension Vector, which should be a column. the code for this looks like: (its still an early draft for my homework, just trying to figure out how to call a subroutine the rest of the code will be done if i can compile this problem)
Program gauss
implicit double precision (A-H,O-Z)
!he directly asked for implicit typing
call Vread(V(N))
end program
Subroutine Vread(V,N)
Implicit double precision (A-H,O-Z)
dimension V(N)
read(*,*) (V(I),I=1,N)
return
end
So my problem is: If I try to compile it with gfortran gauss.exe -o gauss.f the compiler returns with error:
Type mismatch argument 'n' at(1); passed REAL(8) to Integer(4)
In your main program you write
call Vread(V(N)) ! this passes a rank-1 vector with N elements
but your subroutine is declared
Subroutine Vread(V,N) ! this requires 2 arguments
Change the call to
call Vread(V,N)
and let your professor know that the 21st Century arrived a while age. Note too that it is possible to write 21C Fortran in fixed-form. It doesn't make much sense, but might enable you to toe the line while developing in a more modern version of the language.
!he directly asked for implicit typing
I trust that you are in a jurisdiction where you do not pay directly for your education. If you are paying fees then demand more, you're being cheated.
I have 2 dimensional table in file, which look like this:
11, 12, 13, 14, 15
21, 22, 23, 24, 25
I want it to be imported in 2 dimensional array. I wrote this code:
INTEGER :: SMALL(10)
DO I = 1, 3
READ(UNIT=10, FMT='(5I4)') SMALL
WRITE(UNIT=*, FMT='(6X,5I4)') SMALL
ENDDO
But it imports everything in one dimensional array.
EDIT:
I've updated code:
program filet
integer :: reason
integer, dimension(2,5) :: small
open(10, file='boundary.inp', access='sequential', status='old', FORM='FORMATTED')
rewind(10)
DO
READ(UNIT=10, FMT='(5I4)', iostat=reason) SMALL
if (reason /= 0) exit
WRITE(UNIT=*, FMT='(6X,5I4)') SMALL
ENDDO
write (*,*) small(2,1)
end program
Here is output:
11 12 13 14 15
21 22 23 24 25
12
Well, you have defined SMALL to be a 1-D array, and Fortran is just trying to be helpful. You should perhaps have defined SMALL like this;
integer, dimension(2,5) :: small
What happened when the read statement was executed was that the system ran out of edit descriptor (you specified 5 integers) before either SMALL was full or the end of the file was encountered. If I remember rightly Fortran will re-use the edit descriptor until either SMALL is full or the end-of-file is encountered. But this behaviour has been changed over the years, according to Fortran standards, and various compilers have implemented various non-standard features in this part of the language, so you may need to check your compiler's documentation or do some more experiments to figure out exactly what happens.
I think your code is also a bit peculiar in that you read from SMALL 3 times. Why ?
EDIT: OK, we're getting there. You have just discovered that Fortran stores arrays in column-major order. I believe that most other programming languages store them in row-major order. In other words, the first element of your array is small(1,1), the second (in memory) is small(2,1), the third is small(1,2) and so forth. I think that your read (and write) statements are not standard but widely implemented (which is not unusual in Fortran compilers). I may be wrong, it may be standard. Either way, the read statement is being interpreted to read the elements of small in column-major order. The first number read is put in small(1,1), the second in small(2,1), the third in small(1,2) and so on.
Your write statement makes use of the same feature; you might have discovered this for yourself if you had written out the elements in loops with the indices printed too.
The idiomatic Fortran way of reading an array and controlling the order in which elements are placed into the array, is to include an implied-do loop in the read statement, like this:
READ(UNIT=10, FMT='(5I4)', iostat=reason) ((SMALL(row,col), col = 1,numCol), row=1,numRow)
You can also use this approach in write statements.
You should also study your compiler documentation carefully and determine how to switch on warnings for all non-standard features.
Adding to what High Performance Mark wrote...
If you want to use commas to separate the numbers, then you should use list-directed IO rather than formatted IO. (Sometimes this is called format-free IO, but that non-standard term is easy to confuse with binary IO). This is easier to use since you don't have to arrange the numbers precisely in columns and can separate them with spaces or commas. The read is simply "read (10, *) variables"
But sticking to formatted IO, here is some sample code:
program demo1
implicit none
integer, dimension (2,5) :: small
integer :: irow, jcol
open ( unit=10, file='boundary.txt', access='sequential', form='formatted' )
do irow=1, ubound (small, 1)
read (10, '(5I4)') (small (irow, jcol), jcol=1, ubound (small, 2))
end do
write (*, '( / "small (1,2) =", I2, " and small (2,1)=", I2 )' ) small (1,2), small (2,1)
end program demo1
Using the I4 formatted read, the data need to be in columns:
12341234123412341234
11 12 13 14 15
21 22 23 24 25
The data file shouldn't contain the first row "1234..." -- that is in the example to make the alignment required for the format 5I4 clear.
With my example program, there is an outer do loop for irow and an "implied do loop" as part of the read statement. You could also eliminate the outer do loop and use two implied do loops on the read statement, as High Performance Mark showed. In this case, if you kept the format specification (5I4), it would get reused to read the second line -- this is called format reversion. (On a more complicated format, one needs to read the rules to understand which part of the format is reused in format reversion.) This is standard, and has been so at least since FORTRAN 77 and probably FORTRAN IV. (Of course, the declarations and style of my example are Fortran 90).
I used "ubound" so that you neither have to carry around variables storing the dimensions of the array, nor use specific numeric values. The later method can cause problems if you later decide to change the dimension of the array -- then you have to hunt down all of the specific values (here 2 and 5) and change them.
There is no need for a rewind after an open statement.