-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove need for non-standard SIZEOF #89
Merged
wdeconinck
merged 2 commits into
ecmwf-ifs:develop
from
samhatfield:samhatfield/remove_SIZEOF
May 6, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that ICLONELEN could be unininitialized in case
IF( .NOT.ALLOCATED(ZCLONEA(IMLOC)%COMMSBUF) )THEN
(line 868) is not triggered.Probably the
IF(ALLOCATED(ZCLONEA(IMLOC)%COMMSBUF) ) THEN
was still correct.Could it not also be that it needs to stay allocated across iterations? Otherwise why all the guards (line 868).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you want to do this can you just do:
IF( ALLOCATED(ZCLONEA) ) DEALLOCATE(ZCLONEA(IMLOC)%COMMSBUF)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point @wdeconinck - we shouldn't use
ICLONELEN
.The first
IF
has no purpose at all, as far as I can see. I can't see how it's possible forZCLONEA(IMLOC)%COMMSBUF
to not be allocated at line 877.Instead of checking if
ICLONELEN > 0
, why don't we checkSTORAGE_SIZE(ZCLONEA(IMLOC)%COMMSBUF) > 0
?STORAGE_SIZE
is the same asSIZEOF
but returns the bits allocated rather than bytes, and it appears to be part of the Fortran 2008 standard, unlikeSIZEOF
.