[Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?

[Peter Diener]

Hi,

Is SCons supposed to work for fortran codes that use submodules and
type bound procedures? I have a code project that relies heavily on
those features and I would really like to use SCons for it. I was able
to produce a small example code that demonstrates the problem I
encounter (it only appears with more than one submodule) that I have
attached along with the SConstruct file I use.

The code example consists of two modules, each containing a fortran type
with 2 type bound procedures ( a set and get for an integer value). In
the module itself the type and the interface to the procedures are
defined while the actual implementation of the procedures are done in
the submodules. Normally I would keep the module and corresponding
submodule in different files to separate the interface and
implementations.

When I run scons on this example, I get:

scons: Reading SConscript files ...

scons: *** Multiple ways to build the same target were specified for:
function.mod (from ['test_1.f90'] and from ['test_2.f90'])

Is my SConstruct file incorrect, should I not expect SCons to be able
to handle such a case or is this a bug?

My SCons is an up to date checkout of the GitHub repository, i.e.

scons --version

gives:

SCons by Steven Knight et al.:
script: v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c

Note, the example code compiles correctly with a sufficiently new
version of gfortran and the command line:

gfortran test_1.f90 test_2.f90 test_submodules.f90 -o test_submodules.x

Thank you in advance for any advice.

Cheers,

Peter Diener

[Bill Deegan]

Peter,

Any reason you're using the development version of SCons instead of the
released version 3.0.1?

What does scons --tree=prune show you?

-Bill

Hi,
Is SCons supposed to work for fortran codes that use submodules and type
bound procedures? I have a code project that relies heavily on
those features and I would really like to use SCons for it. I was able
to produce a small example code that demonstrates the problem I encounter
(it only appears with more than one submodule) that I have
attached along with the SConstruct file I use.
The code example consists of two modules, each containing a fortran type
with 2 type bound procedures ( a set and get for an integer value). In the
module itself the type and the interface to the procedures are defined
while the actual implementation of the procedures are done in the
submodules. Normally I would keep the module and corresponding submodule in
different files to separate the interface and implementations.
scons: Reading SConscript files ...
function.mod (from ['test_1.f90'] and from ['test_2.f90'])
Is my SConstruct file incorrect, should I not expect SCons to be able to
handle such a case or is this a bug?
My SCons is an up to date checkout of the GitHub repository, i.e.
scons --version
script: v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f
6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
Note, the example code compiles correctly with a sufficiently new version
gfortran test_1.f90 test_2.f90 test_submodules.f90 -o test_submodules.x
Thank you in advance for any advice.
Cheers,
Peter Diener
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Peter Diener]

Hi Bill,

I first saw it with an earlier version of SCons. I don't remember which
one. Before reporting I wanted to check if it was a bug that was already
fixed, so I got the development version. I can try it with the release
version as well.

scons --tree=prune

does not give me any additional information. It gives exactly the same
output as just scons.

Cheers,

Peter

Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 14:46:35
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Any reason you're using the development version of SCons instead of the
released version 3.0.1?
What does scons --tree=prune show you?
-Bill
Hi,
Is SCons supposed to work for fortran codes that use submodules
and type bound procedures? I have a code project that relies
heavily on
those features and I would really like to use SCons for it. I was able
to produce a small example code that demonstrates the problem I
encounter (it only appears with more than one submodule) that I have
attached along with the SConstruct file I use.
The code example consists of two modules, each containing a
fortran type with 2 type bound procedures ( a set and get for an
integer value). In the module itself the type and the interface
to the procedures are defined while the actual implementation of
the procedures are done in the submodules. Normally I would keep
the module and corresponding submodule in different files to
separate the interface and implementations.
scons: Reading SConscript files ...
scons: *** Multiple ways to build the same target were specified
for: function.mod  (from ['test_1.f90'] and from ['test_2.f90'])
Is my SConstruct file incorrect, should I not expect SCons to be
able to handle such a case or is this a bug?
My SCons is an up to date checkout of the GitHub repository, i.e.
scons --version
v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
Note, the example code compiles correctly with a sufficiently
gfortran test_1.f90 test_2.f90 test_submodules.f90 -o
test_submodules.x
Thank you in advance for any advice.
Cheers,
  Peter Diener
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Peter Diener]

Hi,

A quick update. The release version scons-3.0.1 shows exactly the same
behavior.

Cheers,

Peter

Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:38:14
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Hi Bill,
I first saw it with an earlier version of SCons. I don't remember which one.
Before reporting I wanted to check if it was a bug that was already fixed, so
I got the development version. I can try it with the release version as well.
scons --tree=prune
does not give me any additional information. It gives exactly the same output
as just scons.
Cheers,
Peter

Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 14:46:35
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Any reason you're using the development version of SCons instead of the
released version 3.0.1?
What does scons --tree=prune show you?
-Bill
Hi,
Is SCons supposed to work for fortran codes that use submodules
and type bound procedures? I have a code project that relies
heavily on
those features and I would really like to use SCons for it. I was able
to produce a small example code that demonstrates the problem I
encounter (it only appears with more than one submodule) that I have
attached along with the SConstruct file I use.
The code example consists of two modules, each containing a
fortran type with 2 type bound procedures ( a set and get for an
integer value). In the module itself the type and the interface
to the procedures are defined while the actual implementation of
the procedures are done in the submodules. Normally I would keep
the module and corresponding submodule in different files to
separate the interface and implementations.
scons: Reading SConscript files ...
scons: *** Multiple ways to build the same target were specified
for: function.mod  (from ['test_1.f90'] and from ['test_2.f90'])
Is my SConstruct file incorrect, should I not expect SCons to be
able to handle such a case or is this a bug?
My SCons is an up to date checkout of the GitHub repository, i.e.
scons --version
v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
Note, the example code compiles correctly with a sufficiently
gfortran test_1.f90 test_2.f90 test_submodules.f90 -o
test_submodules.x
Thank you in advance for any advice.
Cheers,
  Peter Diener
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Peter Diener]

Hi,

Any further advice on this issue?

Should this go to the developers list?

Cheers,

Peter

Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:48:58
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Hi,
A quick update. The release version scons-3.0.1 shows exactly the same
behavior.
Cheers,
Peter

Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:38:14
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Hi Bill,
I first saw it with an earlier version of SCons. I don't remember which one.
Before reporting I wanted to check if it was a bug that was already fixed,
so I got the development version. I can try it with the release version as
well.
scons --tree=prune
does not give me any additional information. It gives exactly the same
output as just scons.
Cheers,
Peter

Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 14:46:35
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Any reason you're using the development version of SCons instead of the
released version 3.0.1?
What does scons --tree=prune show you?
-Bill
Hi,
Is SCons supposed to work for fortran codes that use submodules
and type bound procedures? I have a code project that relies
heavily on
those features and I would really like to use SCons for it. I was able
to produce a small example code that demonstrates the problem I
encounter (it only appears with more than one submodule) that I have
attached along with the SConstruct file I use.
The code example consists of two modules, each containing a
fortran type with 2 type bound procedures ( a set and get for an
integer value). In the module itself the type and the interface
to the procedures are defined while the actual implementation of
the procedures are done in the submodules. Normally I would keep
the module and corresponding submodule in different files to
separate the interface and implementations.
scons: Reading SConscript files ...
scons: *** Multiple ways to build the same target were specified
for: function.mod  (from ['test_1.f90'] and from ['test_2.f90'])
Is my SConstruct file incorrect, should I not expect SCons to be
able to handle such a case or is this a bug?
My SCons is an up to date checkout of the GitHub repository, i.e.
scons --version
v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
Note, the example code compiles correctly with a sufficiently
gfortran test_1.f90 test_2.f90 test_submodules.f90 -o
test_submodules.x
Thank you in advance for any advice.
Cheers,
  Peter Diener
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Bill Deegan]

User's mailing list is the correct place for this query.
The developer's mailing list is generally for discussing development of
SCons and not really the use thereof.

I'll try and look at this later today.

Post by Peter Diener
Hi,
Any further advice on this issue?
Should this go to the developers list?
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:48:58

Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Hi,
A quick update. The release version scons-3.0.1 shows exactly the same
behavior.
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:38:14

Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Hi Bill,
I first saw it with an earlier version of SCons. I don't remember which
one. Before reporting I wanted to check if it was a bug that was already
fixed, so I got the development version. I can try it with the release
version as well.
scons --tree=prune
does not give me any additional information. It gives exactly the same
output as just scons.
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 14:46:35

Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Any reason you're using the development version of SCons instead of the
released version 3.0.1?
What does scons --tree=prune show you?
-Bill
Hi,
Is SCons supposed to work for fortran codes that use submodules
and type bound procedures? I have a code project that relies
heavily on
those features and I would really like to use SCons for it. I was able
to produce a small example code that demonstrates the problem I
encounter (it only appears with more than one submodule) that I have
attached along with the SConstruct file I use.
The code example consists of two modules, each containing a
fortran type with 2 type bound procedures ( a set and get for an
integer value). In the module itself the type and the interface
to the procedures are defined while the actual implementation of
the procedures are done in the submodules. Normally I would keep
the module and corresponding submodule in different files to
separate the interface and implementations.
scons: Reading SConscript files ...
scons: *** Multiple ways to build the same target were specified
for: function.mod (from ['test_1.f90'] and from ['test_2.f90'])
Is my SConstruct file incorrect, should I not expect SCons to be
able to handle such a case or is this a bug?
My SCons is an up to date checkout of the GitHub repository, i.e.
scons --version
v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
Note, the example code compiles correctly with a sufficiently
gfortran test_1.f90 test_2.f90 test_submodules.f90 -o
test_submodules.x
Thank you in advance for any advice.
Cheers,
Peter Diener
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Peter Diener]

Hi all,

Any thoughts on whether my expectations to SCons are incorrect or
whether there is a bug when it comes to compiling fortran source code
using type bound procedures in submodules?

I can repost my example code that demonstrates the issue if necessary.

Cheers,

Peter

Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 11:13:01
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
User's mailing list is the correct place for this query.
The developer's mailing list is generally for discussing development of
SCons and not really the use thereof.
I'll try and look at this later today.
Hi,
Any further advice on this issue?
Should this go to the developers list?
Cheers,
  Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:48:58
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Hi,
A quick update. The release version scons-3.0.1
shows exactly the same behavior.
Cheers,
 Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:38:14
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons
work correctly for fortran submodules?
Hi Bill,
I first saw it with an earlier version
of SCons. I don't remember which one.
Before reporting I wanted to check if it
was a bug that was already fixed, so I
got the development version. I can try
it with the release version as well.
scons --tree=prune
does not give me any additional
information. It gives exactly the same
output as just scons.
Cheers,
 Peter
On Friday 2018-04-27 14:46, Bill Deegan
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
14:46:35
From: Bill Deegan
Reply-To: SCons users
mailing list
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users]
Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Any reason you're using the
development version of SCons
instead of the
released version 3.0.1?
What does scons --tree=prune
show you?
-Bill
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at
12:04 PM, Peter Diener
     Hi,
     Is SCons supposed to
work for fortran codes that
use submodules
     and type bound
procedures? I have a code
project that relies
     heavily on
     those features and I
would really like to use
SCons for it. I
     was able
     to produce a small
example code that
demonstrates the problem I
     encounter (it only
appears with more than one
submodule) that I
     have
     attached along with the
SConstruct file I use.
     The code example
consists of two modules,
each containing a
     fortran type with 2
type bound procedures ( a
set and get for an
     integer value). In the
module itself the type and
the interface
     to the procedures are
defined while the actual
implementation of
     the procedures are done
in the submodules. Normally
I would keep
     the module and
corresponding submodule in
different files to
     separate the interface
and implementations.
     When I run scons on
     scons: Reading
SConscript files ...
     scons: *** Multiple
ways to build the same
target were specified
     for: function.mod 
(from ['test_1.f90'] and
from ['test_2.f90'])
     Is my SConstruct file
incorrect, should I not
expect SCons to be
     able to handle such a
case or is this a bug?
     My SCons is an up to
date checkout of the GitHub
repository,
     i.e.
     scons --version
     SCons by Steven Knight
   
 v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
     Note, the example code
compiles correctly with a
sufficiently
     new version of gfortran
     gfortran test_1.f90
test_2.f90
test_submodules.f90 -o
     test_submodules.x
     Thank you in advance
for any advice.
     Cheers,
       Peter Diener
   
 _______________________________________________
     Scons-users mailing
list
   
 https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Bill Deegan]

Took a quick look.
It's been a while since I've looked at any fortran and then it was probably
fortran 77.

Just guessing that scons's scanner/emitter sees this:
module function get_n ( this )
class(test_type_1), intent(in) :: this
integer :: get_n
end function get_n

And thinks you'll be outputting a module named function from both source
files.

Can you tell me what the actual generated files are for each of those two
source files?
My guess is this interface/module/endmodule/end interface syntax isn't
being properly handled by SCons

-Bill

Post by Peter Diener
Hi all,
Any thoughts on whether my expectations to SCons are incorrect or whether
there is a bug when it comes to compiling fortran source code using type
bound procedures in submodules?
I can repost my example code that demonstrates the issue if necessary.
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 11:13:01

Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
User's mailing list is the correct place for this query.
The developer's mailing list is generally for discussing development of
SCons and not really the use thereof.
I'll try and look at this later today.
Hi,
Any further advice on this issue?
Should this go to the developers list?
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:48:58
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Hi,
A quick update. The release version scons-3.0.1
shows exactly the same behavior.
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:38:14
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons
work correctly for fortran submodules?
Hi Bill,
I first saw it with an earlier version
of SCons. I don't remember which one.
Before reporting I wanted to check if it
was a bug that was already fixed, so I
got the development version. I can try
it with the release version as well.
scons --tree=prune
does not give me any additional
information. It gives exactly the same
output as just scons.
Cheers,
Peter
On Friday 2018-04-27 14:46, Bill Deegan
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
14:46:35
From: Bill Deegan
Reply-To: SCons users
mailing list
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users]
Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Any reason you're using the
development version of SCons
instead of the
released version 3.0.1?
What does scons --tree=prune
show you?
-Bill
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at
12:04 PM, Peter Diener
Hi,
Is SCons supposed to
work for fortran codes that
use submodules
and type bound
procedures? I have a code
project that relies
heavily on
those features and I
would really like to use
SCons for it. I
was able
to produce a small
example code that
demonstrates the problem I
encounter (it only
appears with more than one
submodule) that I
have
attached along with the
SConstruct file I use.
The code example
consists of two modules,
each containing a
fortran type with 2
type bound procedures ( a
set and get for an
integer value). In the
module itself the type and
the interface
to the procedures are
defined while the actual
implementation of
the procedures are done
in the submodules. Normally
I would keep
the module and
corresponding submodule in
different files to
separate the interface
and implementations.
When I run scons on
scons: Reading
SConscript files ...
scons: *** Multiple
ways to build the same
target were specified
for: function.mod
(from ['test_1.f90'] and
from ['test_2.f90'])
Is my SConstruct file
incorrect, should I not
expect SCons to be
able to handle such a
case or is this a bug?
My SCons is an up to
date checkout of the GitHub
repository,
i.e.
scons --version
SCons by Steven Knight
v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f76
2f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
Note, the example code
compiles correctly with a
sufficiently
new version of gfortran
gfortran test_1.f90
test_2.f90
test_submodules.f90 -o
test_submodules.x
Thank you in advance
for any advice.
Cheers,
Peter Diener
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing
list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/m
ailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Peter Diener]

Hi Bill,

What do you mean by actual generated files? Do you mean what files are
being generated by the compiler?

When compiling with the gfortran -c, test_1.f90 generates:

test_1.mod
test_1.o
test_1.smod
***@test_1_impl.smod

and similarly for test_2.f90 (with 1 replaced by 2).

Cheers,

Peter

Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:33:23
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Took a quick look.
It's been a while since I've looked at any fortran and then it was probably
fortran 77.
module function get_n ( this )
class(test_type_1), intent(in) :: this
integer :: get_n
end function get_n
And thinks you'll be outputting a module named function from both source
files.
Can you tell me what the actual generated files are for each of those two
source files?
My guess is this interface/module/endmodule/end interface syntax isn't being
properly handled by SCons
-Bill
Hi all,
Any thoughts on whether my expectations to SCons are incorrect
or whether there is a bug when it comes to compiling fortran
source code using type bound procedures in submodules?
I can repost my example code that demonstrates the issue if necessary.
Cheers,
  Peter
Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 11:13:01
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
User's mailing list is the correct place for this
query.
The developer's mailing list is generally for
discussing development of
SCons and not really the use thereof.
I'll try and look at this later today.
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Peter Diener
     Hi,
     Any further advice on this issue?
     Should this go to the developers list?
     Cheers,
       Peter
           Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:48:58
           To: SCons users mailing list
           Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons
work correctly
           for fortran submodules?
           Hi,
           A quick update. The release version
scons-3.0.1
           shows exactly the same behavior.
           Cheers,
            Peter
           On Friday 2018-04-27 16:38, Peter Diener
                 Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:38:14
                 From: Peter Diener
                 Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
                 To: SCons users mailing list
                 Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does
SCons
                 work correctly for fortran
submodules?
                 Hi Bill,
                 I first saw it with an earlier
version
                 of SCons. I don't remember which
one.
                 Before reporting I wanted to check
if it
                 was a bug that was already fixed,
so I
                 got the development version. I can
try
                 it with the release version as
well.
                 scons --tree=prune
                 does not give me any additional
                 information. It gives exactly the
same
                 output as just scons.
                 Cheers,
                  Peter
                 On Friday 2018-04-27 14:46, Bill
Deegan
                       Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
                       14:46:35
                       From: Bill Deegan
                       Reply-To: SCons users
                       mailing list
                       To: SCons users mailing list
                       Subject: Re: [Scons-users]
                       Does SCons work correctly
                       for fortran submodules?
                       Peter,
                       Any reason you're using the
                       development version of SCons
                       instead of the
                       released version 3.0.1?
                       What does scons --tree=prune
                       show you?
                       -Bill
                       On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at
                       12:04 PM, Peter Diener
                            Hi,
                            Is SCons supposed to
                       work for fortran codes that
                       use submodules
                            and type bound
                       procedures? I have a code
                       project that relies
                            heavily on
                            those features and I
                       would really like to use
                       SCons for it. I
                            was able
                            to produce a small
                       example code that
                       demonstrates the problem I
                            encounter (it only
                       appears with more than one
                       submodule) that I
                            have
                            attached along with the
                       SConstruct file I use.
                            The code example
                       consists of two modules,
                       each containing a
                            fortran type with 2
                       type bound procedures ( a
                       set and get for an
                            integer value). In the
                       module itself the type and
                       the interface
                            to the procedures are
                       defined while the actual
                       implementation of
                            the procedures are done
                       in the submodules. Normally
                       I would keep
                            the module and
                       corresponding submodule in
                       different files to
                            separate the interface
                       and implementations.
                            When I run scons on
                            scons: Reading
                       SConscript files ...
                            scons: *** Multiple
                       ways to build the same
                       target were specified
                            for: function.mod 
                       (from ['test_1.f90'] and
                       from ['test_2.f90'])
                            Is my SConstruct file
                       incorrect, should I not
                       expect SCons to be
                            able to handle such a
                       case or is this a bug?
                            My SCons is an up to
                       date checkout of the GitHub
                       repository,
                            i.e.
                            scons --version
                            SCons by Steven Knight
                          
                     
  v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
                            Note, the example code
                       compiles correctly with a
                       sufficiently
                            new version of gfortran
                            gfortran test_1.f90
                       test_2.f90
                       test_submodules.f90 -o
                            test_submodules.x
                            Thank you in advance
                       for any advice.
                            Cheers,
                              Peter Diener
                          
                     
  _______________________________________________
                            Scons-users mailing
                       list
                          
                     
  https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Bill Deegan]

Peter,

Yes that what I was looking for.
So is it correct to assume the the contents of
interface
...
end interface

Can be ignored as they don't affect the files output by the fortran
compiler?
(Is this a f90 only feature? or only specify f90 compilers?)

-Bill

Post by Peter Diener
Hi Bill,
What do you mean by actual generated files? Do you mean what files are
being generated by the compiler?
test_1.mod
test_1.o
test_1.smod
and similarly for test_2.f90 (with 1 replaced by 2).
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:33:23

Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Took a quick look.
It's been a while since I've looked at any fortran and then it was probably
fortran 77.
module function get_n ( this )
class(test_type_1), intent(in) :: this
integer :: get_n
end function get_n
And thinks you'll be outputting a module named function from both source
files.
Can you tell me what the actual generated files are for each of those two
source files?
My guess is this interface/module/endmodule/end interface syntax isn't being
properly handled by SCons
-Bill
Hi all,
Any thoughts on whether my expectations to SCons are incorrect
or whether there is a bug when it comes to compiling fortran
source code using type bound procedures in submodules?
I can repost my example code that demonstrates the issue if necessary.
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 11:13:01
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
User's mailing list is the correct place for this
query.
The developer's mailing list is generally for
discussing development of
SCons and not really the use thereof.
I'll try and look at this later today.
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Peter Diener
Hi,
Any further advice on this issue?
Should this go to the developers list?
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:48:58
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons
work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Hi,
A quick update. The release version
scons-3.0.1
shows exactly the same behavior.
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:38:14
From: Peter Diener
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does
SCons
work correctly for fortran
submodules?
Hi Bill,
I first saw it with an earlier
version
of SCons. I don't remember which
one.
Before reporting I wanted to check if it
was a bug that was already fixed,
so I
got the development version. I can try
it with the release version as
well.
scons --tree=prune
does not give me any additional
information. It gives exactly the
same
output as just scons.
Cheers,
Peter
On Friday 2018-04-27 14:46, Bill
Deegan
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
14:46:35
From: Bill Deegan
Reply-To: SCons users
mailing list
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users]
Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Any reason you're using the
development version of SCons
instead of the
released version 3.0.1?
What does scons --tree=prune
show you?
-Bill
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at
12:04 PM, Peter Diener
Hi,
Is SCons supposed to
work for fortran codes that
use submodules
and type bound
procedures? I have a code
project that relies
heavily on
those features and I
would really like to use
SCons for it. I
was able
to produce a small
example code that
demonstrates the problem I
encounter (it only
appears with more than one
submodule) that I
have
attached along with the
SConstruct file I use.
The code example
consists of two modules,
each containing a
fortran type with 2
type bound procedures ( a
set and get for an
integer value). In the
module itself the type and
the interface
to the procedures are
defined while the actual
implementation of
the procedures are done
in the submodules. Normally
I would keep
the module and
corresponding submodule in
different files to
separate the interface
and implementations.
When I run scons on
scons: Reading
SConscript files ...
scons: *** Multiple
ways to build the same
target were specified
for: function.mod
(from ['test_1.f90'] and
from ['test_2.f90'])
Is my SConstruct file
incorrect, should I not
expect SCons to be
able to handle such a
case or is this a bug?
My SCons is an up to
date checkout of the GitHub
repository,
i.e.
scons --version
SCons by Steven Knight
v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b
23d0c
Note, the example code
compiles correctly with a
sufficiently
new version of gfortran
gfortran test_1.f90
test_2.f90
test_submodules.f90 -o
test_submodules.x
Thank you in advance
for any advice.
Cheers,
Peter Diener
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing
list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Peter Diener]

Bill,

I would think that is a correct assumption. Inside the interface block
the keyword module does not actually define a module but rather tells
the compiler that the source code for the function or subroutine will be
provided later in the submodule. I guess you have to take the fact that
the meaning of module is context dependent up with the designers of the
fortran standard:-)

Submodules is only required to be present in a Fortran 2008 standard
compliant compiler but may be provided by Fortran 20003 standard
compliant compilers.

I don't know whether all compilers handle this in the same way, but I
just tried ifort and in that case the generate files were:

test_1.mod
test_1.o
***@test_1_impl.smod

so except for ifort not generating test_1.smod, the behaviour seems
similar.

Cheers,

Peter

Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 11:19:30
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Yes that what I was looking for.
So is it correct to assume the the contents of
interface
 ...
end interface
Can be ignored as they don't affect the files output by the fortran
compiler?
(Is this a f90 only feature? or only specify f90 compilers?)
-Bill
Hi Bill,
What do you mean by actual generated files? Do you mean what
files are being generated by the compiler?
test_1.mod
test_1.o
test_1.smod
and similarly for test_2.f90 (with 1 replaced by 2).
Cheers,
  Peter
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:33:23
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Took a quick look.
It's been a while since I've looked at any fortran
and then it was probably
fortran 77.
Just guessing that scons's scanner/emitter sees
module function get_n ( this )
class(test_type_1), intent(in) :: this
integer :: get_n
end function get_n
And thinks you'll be outputting a module named
function from both source
files.
Can you tell me what the actual generated files are
for each of those two
source files?
My guess is this interface/module/endmodule/end
interface syntax isn't being
properly handled by SCons
-Bill
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:14 AM, Peter Diener
     Hi all,
     Any thoughts on whether my expectations to
SCons are incorrect
     or whether there is a bug when it comes to
compiling fortran
     source code using type bound procedures in
submodules?
     I can repost my example code that demonstrates
the issue if
     necessary.
     Cheers,
       Peter
     On Thursday 2018-05-03 11:13, Bill Deegan
           Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 11:13:01
           From: Bill Deegan
           Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
           To: SCons users mailing list
           Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons
work correctly
           for fortran submodules?
           User's mailing list is the correct place
for this
           query.
           The developer's mailing list is generally
for
           discussing development of
           SCons and not really the use thereof.
           I'll try and look at this later today.
           On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Peter
Diener
                Hi,
                Any further advice on this issue?
                Should this go to the developers
list?
                Cheers,
                  Peter
                On Friday 2018-04-27 16:48, Peter
                      Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
16:48:58
                      From: Peter Diener
                      To: SCons users mailing list
                      Subject: Re: [Scons-users]
Does SCons
           work correctly
                      for fortran submodules?
                      Hi,
                      A quick update. The release
version
           scons-3.0.1
                      shows exactly the same
behavior.
                      Cheers,
                       Peter
                      On Friday 2018-04-27 16:38,
Peter Diener
                            Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
16:38:14
                            From: Peter Diener
                            Reply-To: SCons users
mailing list
                            To: SCons users mailing
list
[Scons-users] Does
           SCons
                            work correctly for
fortran
           submodules?
                            Hi Bill,
                            I first saw it with an
earlier
           version
                            of SCons. I don't
remember which
           one.
                            Before reporting I
wanted to check
           if it
                            was a bug that was
already fixed,
           so I
                            got the development
version. I can
           try
                            it with the release
version as
           well.
                            scons --tree=prune
                            does not give me any
additional
                            information. It gives
exactly the
           same
                            output as just scons.
                            Cheers,
                             Peter
                            On Friday 2018-04-27
14:46, Bill
           Deegan
                                  Date: Fri, 27 Apr
2018
                                  14:46:35
                                  From: Bill Deegan
                                
                                  Reply-To: SCons
users
                                  mailing list
                                
                                  To: SCons users
mailing list
                                
[Scons-users]
                                  Does SCons work
correctly
                                  for fortran
submodules?
                                  Peter,
                                  Any reason you're
using the
                                  development
version of SCons
                                  instead of the
                                  released version
3.0.1?
                                  What does scons
--tree=prune
                                  show you?
                                  -Bill
                                  On Fri, Apr 27,
2018 at
                                  12:04 PM, Peter
Diener
                                
                                       Hi,
                                       Is SCons
supposed to
                                  work for fortran
codes that
                                  use submodules
                                       and type
bound
                                  procedures? I have
a code
                                  project that
relies
                                       heavily on
                                       those
features and I
                                  would really like
to use
                                  SCons for it. I
                                       was able
                                       to produce a
small
                                  example code that
                                  demonstrates the
problem I
                                       encounter (it
only
                                  appears with more
than one
                                  submodule) that I
                                       have
                                       attached
along with the
                                  SConstruct file I
use.
                                       The code
example
                                  consists of two
modules,
                                  each containing a
                                       fortran type
with 2
                                  type bound
procedures ( a
                                  set and get for an
                                       integer
value). In the
                                  module itself the
type and
                                  the interface
                                       to the
procedures are
                                  defined while the
actual
                                  implementation of
                                       the
procedures are done
                                  in the submodules.
Normally
                                  I would keep
                                       the module
and
                                  corresponding
submodule in
                                  different files to
                                       separate the
interface
                                  and
implementations.
                                       When I run
scons on
                                  this example, I
Reading
                                  SConscript files
...
                                       scons: ***
Multiple
                                  ways to build the
same
                                  target were
specified
function.mod 
                                  (from
['test_1.f90'] and
                                  from
['test_2.f90'])
                                       Is my
SConstruct file
                                  incorrect, should
I not
                                  expect SCons to be
                                       able to
handle such a
                                  case or is this a
bug?
                                       My SCons is
an up to
                                  date checkout of
the GitHub
                                  repository,
                                       i.e.
                                       scons
--version
                                       SCons by
Steven Knight
                                              
                                     
                                
         
   v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
                                       Note, the
example code
                                  compiles correctly
with a
                                  sufficiently
                                       new version
of gfortran
                                  and the command
                                       gfortran
test_1.f90
                                  test_2.f90
                                
 test_submodules.f90 -o
                                     
 test_submodules.x
                                       Thank you in
advance
                                  for any advice.
                                       Cheers,
                                         Peter
Diener
                                     
                                
         
   _______________________________________________
                                       Scons-users
mailing
                                  list
                                     
                                     
                                
         
   https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
         
 _______________________________________________
           Scons-users mailing list
         
 https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Bill Deegan]

Can you file a bug with your sample files on github?

Post by Peter Diener
Bill,
I would think that is a correct assumption. Inside the interface block
the keyword module does not actually define a module but rather tells the
compiler that the source code for the function or subroutine will be
provided later in the submodule. I guess you have to take the fact that the
meaning of module is context dependent up with the designers of the fortran
standard:-)
Submodules is only required to be present in a Fortran 2008 standard
compliant compiler but may be provided by Fortran 20003 standard compliant
compilers.
I don't know whether all compilers handle this in the same way, but I just
test_1.mod
test_1.o
so except for ifort not generating test_1.smod, the behaviour seems
similar.
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 11:19:30

Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Yes that what I was looking for.
So is it correct to assume the the contents of
interface
...
end interface
Can be ignored as they don't affect the files output by the fortran
compiler?
(Is this a f90 only feature? or only specify f90 compilers?)
-Bill
Hi Bill,
What do you mean by actual generated files? Do you mean what
files are being generated by the compiler?
test_1.mod
test_1.o
test_1.smod
and similarly for test_2.f90 (with 1 replaced by 2).
Cheers,
Peter
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:33:23
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Took a quick look.
It's been a while since I've looked at any fortran
and then it was probably
fortran 77.
Just guessing that scons's scanner/emitter sees
module function get_n ( this )
class(test_type_1), intent(in) :: this
integer :: get_n
end function get_n
And thinks you'll be outputting a module named
function from both source
files.
Can you tell me what the actual generated files are
for each of those two
source files?
My guess is this interface/module/endmodule/end
interface syntax isn't being
properly handled by SCons
-Bill
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:14 AM, Peter Diener
Hi all,
Any thoughts on whether my expectations to
SCons are incorrect
or whether there is a bug when it comes to
compiling fortran
source code using type bound procedures in
submodules?
I can repost my example code that demonstrates
the issue if
necessary.
Cheers,
Peter
On Thursday 2018-05-03 11:13, Bill Deegan
Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 11:13:01
From: Bill Deegan
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons
work correctly
for fortran submodules?
User's mailing list is the correct place for this
query.
The developer's mailing list is generally for
discussing development of
SCons and not really the use thereof.
I'll try and look at this later today.
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Peter
Diener
Hi,
Any further advice on this issue?
Should this go to the developers
list?
Cheers,
Peter
On Friday 2018-04-27 16:48, Peter
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
16:48:58
From: Peter Diener
To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users]
Does SCons
work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Hi,
A quick update. The release
version
scons-3.0.1
shows exactly the same
behavior.
Cheers,
Peter
On Friday 2018-04-27 16:38,
Peter Diener
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
16:38:14
From: Peter Diener
Reply-To: SCons users
mailing list
To: SCons users mailing list
[Scons-users] Does
SCons
work correctly for
fortran
submodules?
Hi Bill,
I first saw it with an
earlier
version
of SCons. I don't
remember which
one.
Before reporting I
wanted to check
if it
was a bug that was
already fixed,
so I
got the development
version. I can
try
it with the release
version as
well.
scons --tree=prune
does not give me any
additional
information. It gives
exactly the
same
output as just scons.
Cheers,
Peter
On Friday 2018-04-27
14:46, Bill
Deegan
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018
14:46:35
From: Bill Deegan
Reply-To: SCons
users
mailing list
To: SCons users
mailing list
[Scons-users]
Does SCons work
correctly
for fortran
submodules?
Peter,
Any reason you're using the
development
version of SCons
instead of the
released version
3.0.1?
What does scons
--tree=prune
show you?
-Bill
On Fri, Apr 27,
2018 at
12:04 PM, Peter
Diener
Hi,
Is SCons
supposed to
work for fortran
codes that
use submodules
and type
bound
procedures? I have a code
project that
relies
heavily on
those
features and I
would really like to use
SCons for it. I
was able
to produce a small
example code that
demonstrates the
problem I
encounter (it only
appears with more than one
submodule) that I
have
attached
along with the
SConstruct file I use.
The code
example
consists of two
modules,
each containing a
fortran type with 2
type bound
procedures ( a
set and get for an
integer
value). In the
module itself the type and
the interface
to the
procedures are
defined while the actual
implementation of
the
procedures are done
in the submodules. Normally
I would keep
the module
and
corresponding
submodule in
different files to
separate the interface
and
implementations.
When I run
scons on
this example, I
Reading
SConscript files
...
scons: ***
Multiple
ways to build the same
target were
specified
function.mod
(from
['test_1.f90'] and
from
['test_2.f90'])
Is my
SConstruct file
incorrect, should I not
expect SCons to be
able to
handle such a
case or is this a bug?
My SCons is
an up to
date checkout of
the GitHub
repository,
i.e.
scons
--version
SCons by
Steven Knight
v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822
b23d0c
Note, the
example code
compiles correctly with a
sufficiently
new version
of gfortran
and the command
gfortran
test_1.f90
test_2.f90
test_submodules.f90 -o
test_submodules.x
Thank you in advance
for any advice.
Cheers,
Peter
Diener
_______________________________________________
Scons-users
mailing
list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

[Peter Diener]

Done. Issue 3135.

Thanks for looking into it.

Cheers,

Peter

Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 12:31:35
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly for fortran submodules?
Can you file a bug with your sample files on github?
Bill,
I would think that is a correct assumption. Inside the interface block
the keyword module does not actually define a module but rather
tells the compiler that the source code for the function or
subroutine will be provided later in the submodule. I guess you
have to take the fact that the meaning of module is context
dependent up with the designers of the fortran standard:-)
Submodules is only required to be present in a Fortran 2008
standard compliant compiler but may be provided by Fortran 20003
standard compliant compilers.
I don't know whether all compilers handle this in the same way,
test_1.mod
test_1.o
so except for ifort not generating test_1.smod, the behaviour
seems similar.
Cheers,
  Peter
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 11:19:30
Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons work correctly
for fortran submodules?
Peter,
Yes that what I was looking for.
So is it correct to assume the the contents of
interface
 ...
end interface
Can be ignored as they don't affect the files output by the fortran
compiler?
(Is this a f90 only feature? or only specify f90
compilers?)
-Bill
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Peter Diener
     Hi Bill,
     What do you mean by actual generated files? Do
you mean what
     files are being generated by the compiler?
     When compiling with the gfortran -c, test_1.f90
     test_1.mod
     test_1.o
     test_1.smod
     and similarly for test_2.f90 (with 1 replaced
by 2).
     Cheers,
       Peter
     On Thursday 2018-05-31 10:33, Bill Deegan
           Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:33:23
           From: Bill Deegan
           Reply-To: SCons users mailing list
           To: SCons users mailing list
           Subject: Re: [Scons-users] Does SCons
work correctly
           for fortran submodules?
           Took a quick look.
           It's been a while since I've looked at
any fortran
           and then it was probably
           fortran 77.
           Just guessing that scons's
scanner/emitter sees
           module function get_n ( this )
           class(test_type_1), intent(in) :: this
           integer :: get_n
           end function get_n
           And thinks you'll be outputting a module
named
           function from both source
           files.
           Can you tell me what the actual generated
files are
           for each of those two
           source files?
           My guess is this
interface/module/endmodule/end
           interface syntax isn't being
           properly handled by SCons
           -Bill
           On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:14 AM, Peter
Diener
                Hi all,
                Any thoughts on whether my
expectations to
           SCons are incorrect
                or whether there is a bug when it
comes to
           compiling fortran
                source code using type bound
procedures in
           submodules?
                I can repost my example code that
demonstrates
           the issue if
                necessary.
                Cheers,
                  Peter
                On Thursday 2018-05-03 11:13, Bill
Deegan
                      Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 11:13:01
                      From: Bill Deegan
                      Reply-To: SCons users mailing
list
                      To: SCons users mailing list
                      Subject: Re: [Scons-users]
Does SCons
           work correctly
                      for fortran submodules?
                      User's mailing list is the
correct place
           for this
                      query.
                      The developer's mailing list
is generally
           for
                      discussing development of
                      SCons and not really the use
thereof.
                      I'll try and look at this
later today.
                      On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 11:26
AM, Peter
           Diener
                           Hi,
                           Any further advice on
this issue?
                           Should this go to the
developers
           list?
                           Cheers,
                             Peter
                           On Friday 2018-04-27
16:48, Peter
                                 Date: Fri, 27 Apr
2018
           16:48:58
                                 From: Peter Diener
                                 To: SCons users
mailing list
[Scons-users]
           Does SCons
                      work correctly
                                 for fortran
submodules?
                                 Hi,
                                 A quick update. The
release
           version
                      scons-3.0.1
                                 shows exactly the
same
           behavior.
                                 Cheers,
                                  Peter
                                 On Friday
2018-04-27 16:38,
           Peter Diener
                                       Date: Fri, 27
Apr 2018
           16:38:14
                                       From: Peter
Diener
SCons users
           mailing list
                                     
                                       To: SCons
users mailing
           list
                                     
           [Scons-users] Does
                      SCons
                                       work
correctly for
           fortran
                      submodules?
                                       Hi Bill,
                                       I first saw
it with an
           earlier
                      version
                                       of SCons. I
don't
           remember which
                      one.
                                       Before
reporting I
           wanted to check
                      if it
                                       was a bug
that was
           already fixed,
                      so I
                                       got the
development
           version. I can
                      try
                                       it with the
release
           version as
                      well.
                                       scons
--tree=prune
                                       does not give
me any
           additional
                                       information.
It gives
           exactly the
                      same
                                       output as
just scons.
                                       Cheers,
                                        Peter
                                       On Friday
2018-04-27
           14:46, Bill
                      Deegan
Fri, 27 Apr
           2018
                                           
 14:46:35
Bill Deegan
                                           
                                           
 Reply-To: SCons
           users
                                             mailing
list
                                           
SCons users
           mailing list
                                           
                                           
           [Scons-users]
                                             Does
SCons work
           correctly
                                             for
fortran
           submodules?
                                             Peter,
                                             Any
reason you're
           using the
                                           
 development
           version of SCons
                                             instead
of the
                                           
 released version
           3.0.1?
                                             What
does scons
           --tree=prune
                                             show
you?
                                             -Bill
                                             On Fri,
Apr 27,
           2018 at
                                             12:04
PM, Peter
           Diener
                                           
                                                
 Hi,
                                                  Is
SCons
           supposed to
                                             work
for fortran
           codes that
                                             use
submodules
                                                
 and type
           bound
                                           
 procedures? I have
           a code
                                             project
that
           relies
                                                
 heavily on
                                                
 those
           features and I
                                             would
really like
           to use
                                             SCons
for it. I
                                                
 was able
                                                  to
produce a
           small
                                             example
code that
                                           
 demonstrates the
           problem I
                                                
 encounter (it
           only
                                             appears
with more
           than one
                                           
 submodule) that I
                                                
 have
                                                
 attached
           along with the
                                           
 SConstruct file I
           use.
                                                
 The code
           example
                                           
 consists of two
           modules,
                                             each
containing a
                                                
 fortran type
           with 2
                                             type
bound
           procedures ( a
                                             set and
get for an
                                                
 integer
           value). In the
                                             module
itself the
           type and
                                             the
interface
                                                  to
the
           procedures are
                                             defined
while the
           actual
                                           
 implementation of
                                                
 the
           procedures are done
                                             in the
submodules.
           Normally
                                             I would
keep
                                                
 the module
           and
                                           
 corresponding
           submodule in
                                           
 different files to
                                                
 separate the
           interface
                                             and
           implementations.
                                                
 When I run
           scons on
                                             this
example, I
                                                
           Reading
                                           
 SConscript files
           ...
                                                
 scons: ***
           Multiple
                                             ways to
build the
           same
                                             target
were
           specified
                                                
           function.mod 
                                             (from
           ['test_1.f90'] and
                                             from
           ['test_2.f90'])
                                                  Is
my
           SConstruct file
                                           
 incorrect, should
           I not
                                             expect
SCons to be
                                                
 able to
           handle such a
                                             case or
is this a
           bug?
                                                  My
SCons is
           an up to
                                             date
checkout of
           the GitHub
                                           
 repository,
                                                
 i.e.
                                                
 scons
           --version
                                                
                                                
 SCons by
           Steven Knight
                                                   
     
                                                
                                           
                    
         
    v3.1.0.alpha.yyyymmdd.867f762f6c1e23524cd1b0262b8e93e822b23d0c
                                                
 Note, the
           example code
                                           
 compiles correctly
           with a
                                           
 sufficiently
                                                
 new version
           of gfortran
                                             and the
command
                                                
 gfortran
           test_1.f90
                                           
 test_2.f90
                                           
            test_submodules.f90 -o
                                                
            test_submodules.x
                                                
 Thank you in
           advance
                                             for any
advice.
                                                
 Cheers,
                                                   
Peter
           Diener
                                                
                                           
                    
         
    _______________________________________________
                                                
 Scons-users
           mailing
                                             list
                                                
                                                
                                           
                    
         
    https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
                    
         
  _______________________________________________
                      Scons-users mailing list
                    
         
  https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
         
 _______________________________________________
           Scons-users mailing list
         
 https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users