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

[Peter Diener]

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 wrote:

>Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:38:14
>From: Peter Diener <diener at cct.lsu.edu>
>Reply-To: SCons users mailing list <scons-users at scons.org>
>To: SCons users mailing list <scons-users at scons.org>
>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 wrote:
>
>> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 14:46:35
>> From: Bill Deegan <bill at baddogconsulting.com>
>> Reply-To: SCons users mailing list <scons-users at scons.org>
>> To: SCons users mailing list <scons-users at scons.org>
>> 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 <diener at cct.lsu.edu> wrote:
>>      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
>>
>>      _______________________________________________
>>      Scons-users mailing list
>>      Scons-users at scons.org
>>      https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>