LAPACK Archives

[Lapack] Error in compiling Lapack 3.2


Hello
thanks a lot.
All these complains look correct. I have checked a few.
I confirm the fix for ZCPOSV:
--> ZCPOSV: line 214: WORK should be RWORK for sure
We will look at the 22 extra precisie iterative refinement 
routine as well.
Best wishes,
Julien.


On Sat, 7 Feb 2009, faber80@Domain.Removed wrote:


Hi, I've tried to compile the lapack package version 3.2 on my win-32 PC 
using the Intel visual Fortran compiler V11 inside Visual Studio 2008, but
I've found the following errors:

zsyrfsx.f?? Line 464 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK?? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zherfsx.f?? Line 463 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zherfsx.f?? Line 476 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zgerfsx.f?? Line 498 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument RWORK (propably should be WORK not to receive the
error)
zgerfsx.f?? Line 505 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument RWORK (propably should be WORK not to receive the
error)
csyrfsx.f?? Line 464 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK?? (propably should be WORK not to receive the
error)
cgbrfsx.f?? Line 515 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument RWORK (propably should be WORK not to receive the
error)
cgbrfsx.f?? Line 522 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument RWORK (propably should beRWORK not to receive the
error)
cposvxx.f?? Line 520 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
cposvxx.f?? Line 527 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zporfsx.f?? Line 457 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zporfsx.f?? Line 470 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
cherfsx.f?? Line 463 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
cherfsx.f?? Line 476 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
cporsfx.f?? Line 457 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
csysvxx.f?? Line 529 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
csysvxx.f?? Line 538 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zhsevxx.f?? Line 525 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zhsevxx.f?? Line 534 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zsysvxx.f?? Line 526 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zsysvxx.f?? Line 535 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK? (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)
zcposv.f??? Line 214 The type of the actual argument differ from the type of 
the dummy argument? WORK (propably should be RWORK not to receive the
error)

I've checked the errors and the variables type mismatch exists. Is this a bug 
or must I activate some compiler option in order not to reach this kind
of errorrs?

Thank you




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>


For additional information you may use the LAPACK/ScaLAPACK Forum.
Or one of the mailing lists, or