ambivalence about fortran (was Re: numpy & non-Apple gcc?)

[Jeremy Lavergne]

Well MacPorts is ready to do binary distribution: how would that ability change your your prospects?

"Takeshi Enomoto" <takeshi at macports.org> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>A few years ago sci port maintainers agreed to use gcc43 (now gcc44)
>as defaut.
>I prefer g95 but I accepted it since gfortran is a majority
>has more features (cray pointers, OpenMP) and has become as reliable as g95.
>
>There is a drawback.
>It takes hours to build gcc4x to obtain gfortran.
>g95 requires less since it only builds c and fortran.
>Once gcc4x is installed it keeps rebuilding upon revision or version updates.
>
>gcc4x could be built quickly if fortran, java, and objc were variants
>or they were separate ports.
>
>I need fortran at work and I like it but it is a problem for sci apps in MacPorts.
>It is better to avoid fortran as a default if possible when writing a port.
>Recently I try to make fortran as variant
>if fortran is required to build a fortran interface (eg. plplot, grib_api).
>
>ATLAS also needs a long time.
>I am asking the maintainer of octave to add no_atlas variant.
><http://trac.macports.org/ticket/21797>
>It has been a reasonable choice to use atlas
>since there is a problem linking to some functions in Apple's accelerate.
>This was especially true with g95.
>I came up with a solution posted in the url above.
>
>Takeshi
>
>_______________________________________________
>macports-dev mailing list
>macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org
>http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev