Re: Octave & Fortran continued

[Benjamin Lindner]

Michael Goffioul wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Michael Goffioul
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Jaroslav Hajek <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > hello,
> > >
> > > further to the recent discussion about Octave's Fortran compiler
> > > support, here's an important (IMHO) update:
> > > I've just noticed that the unbelievable thing actually happened and
> > > LAPACK moved (apart from a number of improvements etc) to Fortran 90,
> > > so F90 compiler is officially required to build LAPACK 3.2. Since
> > > Octave probably really wants to keep up with LAPACK as it relies
> > > fundamentally on it, we should IMHO think about ways to overcome the
> > > limitations of the MSVC/Windows platform that keep Octave stuck with
> > > the subset of Fortran that f2c supports.
> > > Hmm, another clear signal that Fortran is not dead.
> > >
> > > So, is it really impossible to use gfortran or g95 on Windows together
> > > with MSVC?
> > Definitely no idea...
> > I'll have to give it a try.
>
> Just for the record, mixing code gfortran and MSVC is a tough beast
> and up to now I didn't succeed. Doing the same with g77 was easier
> as MSVC could link in g77-compiled objects by also linking to libf2c
> (compiled with MSVC). This provided the needed runtime functions
> required by g77-compiled code.
>
> Given all these problems, I decided to give MinGW a try, using the
> latest version based on gcc-4.3.0. But recompiling all deps takes
> time, given the only 30min of free time I have in the evening...

I found that the 'official' mingw gcc-4.3.0 package is quite buggy in 
the sense of packaging.
I switched to TDM's ports of mingw32/gcc and they work like a charm in 
my case.
I currently use gcc-tdm-4.3.0-2, which also contains gfortran.
However I have no experience in the combination mingw/msvc...

benjamin