In all likelihood, there are bugs in your code (deviations from the Fortran standard) that did not show up when you used the Compaq compiler, or the code relied on nonstandard extensions provided by the compiler (for example, implicit SAVE of all local variables).

Read this note:

Migrating from CVF

and, if there are still questions left unanswered, you may ask here.

Also, if you would like help, please post or attach the code in question along with the error messages. If you are getting argument type mismatch errors or similar, then these are coding errors not detected by the earlier compiler.

Please note that Intel Visual Fortran is directly descended from Compaq Visual Fortran (there was never any such thing as Compaq F77), so correct code should work.

Ok, so you do indeed have bugs in your code that were not detected by the Compaq compiler.

For the first case, it is an error for an array dummy argument in the subroutine to be larger than the array you are passing to it. You should fix this, as otherwise you may get unpredictable results. If you know that the subroutine never accesses past the end of the array, declare it with (*) in the subroutine instead of the larger size.

In the second case, you make the invalid assumption that local variables retain their value across calls without the SAVE attribute. Add a SAVE statement in the subroutine that names the variables where this is needed. You can just say SAVE with no variable names listed, and all will be saved.

The article on migrating from Compaq Visual Fortran is the best resource. We have made many improvements to error detection, so sometimes programs thast CVF let by are now detected as errors.

Please describe the problems and we'll be glad to help you with them.

Quote:

Steve Lionel (Intel) wrote:

Also, if you would like help, please post or attach the code in question along with the error messages. If you are getting argument type mismatch errors or similar, then these are coding errors not detected by the earlier compiler.

Please note that Intel Visual Fortran is directly descended from Compaq Visual Fortran (there was never any such thing as Compaq F77), so correct code should work.

Could you please help me? I have a code (attached with the post, downloaded from netlib.org) which used to work fine with Compaq, but it does not give proper results in Intel. I am calling ranf() function which logically should return a random value between 0 - 1, but it gives me 48271.0 always. :( Looking forward for your reply.

Regards,
Vinod

Vinod, RANF is a non-standard routine and, as such, its meaning can vary by implementation. However, looking at my CVF documentation I don't see that it defined a RANF function at all. (I can't try it out until tomorrow.) We document RANF as returning a value in the range 0. to 32767. which is apparently consistent with a similar C function.

I strongly recommend that you use the standard Fortran intrinsic RANDOM_NUMBER. If you want the sequence to vary each run, insert a single call to RANDOM_SEED, without arguments, at the beginning of your program. (Note that RANDOM_NUMBER is a subroutine, not a function.)

The file that was attached (snorm.f) contains a function that returns normally distributed real numbers, which it obtains from uniformly distributed random numbers using a transformation. The uniformly distributed random numbers are supposed to be obtained by calling RANF(), which https://wci.llnl.gov/codes/basis/manual/node183.html identifies as an old 48-bit RNG.

This RANF was part of Mathlib on CRAY computers, and there is mention of RANF in the CXML library documentation that came with Compaq Visual Fortran, but that documentation says that the Windows version of CXML did not have the Scilib component, which would have provided RANF.

Steve's advice to call the modern RANDOM_NUMBER is good. If, however, you need to reproduce the behavior of old code I suggest that you change all instances of RANF in snorm.f to ORANF, and use the following for ORANF, which implements the old function referenced above.

      function oranf()

      integer*8 S,a,M

      data S/Z'0000948253fc9cd1'/,a/Z'00002875a2e7b175'/

      data M/Z'0001000000000000'/

      oranf=real(S)/M

      S=iand(a*S,Z'0000FFFFFFFFFFFF')

      return

      end

GNU's GSL library contains the RANF as one of several selectable generators. To use it from Fortran, you will need to write a suitable wrapper function.

Quote:

mecej4 wrote:

The file that was attached (snorm.f) contains a function that returns normally distributed real numbers, which it obtains from uniformly distributed random numbers using a transformation. The uniformly distributed random numbers are supposed to be obtained by calling RANF(), which https://wci.llnl.gov/codes/basis/manual/node183.html identifies as an old 48-bit RNG.

This RANF was part of Mathlib on CRAY computers, and there is mention of RANF in the CXML library documentation that came with Compaq Visual Fortran, but that documentation says that the Windows version of CXML did not have the Scilib component, which would have provided RANF.

Steve's advice to call the modern RANDOM_NUMBER is good. If, however, you need to reproduce the behavior of old code I suggest that you change all instances of RANF in snorm.f to ORANF, and use the following for ORANF, which implements the old function referenced above.

function oranf() integer*8 S,a,M data S/Z'0000948253fc9cd1'/,a/Z'00002875a2e7b175'/ data M/Z'0001000000000000'/ oranf=real(S)/M S=iand(a*S,Z'0000FFFFFFFFFFFF') return end

Thank you Steve and mecej4 for your replies. The function, oranf() has solved my problem. :)
With best regards,
Vinod