Is there any [disclosable] information on the availability if ISO C binding features in Intel Fortran? The existing support for the related !DEC$ directives should be quite helpful.

Also, the standard does not mention alternative calling conventions. Do you know how Intel plans to handle STDCALL versus CDECL? Perhaps it is likely that Win32 programmers will have to keep using the !DEC$ directives?

5 posts / 0 new
Last post
For more complete information about compiler optimizations, see our Optimization Notice.

Can't comment - sorry. We know it's a popular request.

Given that ISO_C_BINDING is a C binding, it would follow C defaults and directives would still be needed if those defaults were inappropriate.

Retired 12/31/2016

Is there any more information on this topic? If not, why is this a secret?

I am particularly interested in using C_INT128_T. I have version Build 20121010 and this is not available, whereas it is available in gfortran. Is this going to be included any time soon? Is there any alternative that can be used to define a 128-bit integer?

I suppose ifort would not have c_int128_t unless it were adopted by icc for all supported platforms (tough, given the built-in incompatibility between gcc and MSVC).  In Icc, you need _m128 data types for such purposes (possibly in a union with an array of interoperabile type), and it's lacking in portability.

This thread is from 2006. SInce then we did implement all of the C interoperability features from Fortran 2003 and it is fully documented. We chose not to integrate STDCALL into this, though.

Intel Fortran does not have a 128-bit integer kind. We know gfortran has one.

Retired 12/31/2016

Leave a Comment

Please sign in to add a comment. Not a member? Join today