I am used to using the following syntax
subroutine CalcA(A,N)
!DEC$ ATTRIBUTES DLLEXPORT :: CALCA
!DEC$ ATTRIBUTES ALIAS:'CalcA' :: CalcA
IMPLICIT NONE
...
end subroutine CalcA
which produces an exported function in a .dll
So now I am trying the new ISO_C_BINDING with the following code
subroutine CalcA(A,N) BIND(C, NAME="CalcA")
USE, INTRINSIC :: ISO_C_BINDING
IMPLICIT NONE
...
end subroutine CalcA
But the export function is not created
So what am I missing here? How is the new iso_c_binding going to replace the deprecated !DEC$ ATTRIBUTE DLLEXPORT declarations?
PS. I am on Intel Fortran XE 2013 on a Win7-64 platform through VS2010.
As Hans suggests, the procedure wasn't exported because the linker wasn't asked to export it.
The binding label in the BIND clause (the ISO_C_BINDING module is not relevant to the discussion) practically sets the "linker name" of the procedure (similar to what ATTRIBUTES ALIAS does) and does so in a manner that is consistent with C. The BIND clause also sets the calling convention to be C compatible (similar to ATTRIBUTES C). The collective effect of the BIND clause also includes that of ATTRIBUTES DECORATE (and there may be other subtle differences between the collective compiler directive attributes and the clause that I've no considered).
There are at least three ways of marking a procedure such that it is exported in a DLL:
entries in the object file that holds the procedure (this is how ATTRIBUTES DLLEXPORT works with ifort).
entries in the EXPORTS section of a module definition file (.DEF) that is passed to the linker at link time.
command link arguments to the linker itself (/EXPORT:xxx).
What's best for you depends... some prefer to have in-source documentation of the export, others find the visual appearance and non-standard nature of compiler directives intolerably odious.
Related
I am trying to build a Fortran program, but I get errors about an undefined reference or an unresolved external symbol. I've seen another question about these errors, but the answers there are mostly specific to C++.
What are common causes of these errors when writing in Fortran, and how do I fix/prevent them?
This is a canonical question for a whole class of errors when building Fortran programs. If you've been referred here or had your question closed as a duplicate of this one, you may need to read one or more of several answers. Start with this answer which acts as a table of contents for solutions provided.
A link-time error like these messages can be for many of the same reasons as for more general uses of the linker, rather than just having compiled a Fortran program. Some of these are covered in the linked question about C++ linking and in another answer here: failing to specify the library, or providing them in the wrong order.
However, there are common mistakes in writing a Fortran program that can lead to link errors.
Unsupported intrinsics
If a subroutine reference is intended to refer to an intrinsic subroutine then this can lead to a link-time error if that subroutine intrinsic isn't offered by the compiler: it is taken to be an external subroutine.
implicit none
call unsupported_intrinsic
end
With unsupported_intrinsic not provided by the compiler we may see a linking error message like
undefined reference to `unsupported_intrinsic_'
If we are using a non-standard, or not commonly implemented, intrinsic we can help our compiler report this in a couple of ways:
implicit none
intrinsic :: my_intrinsic
call my_intrinsic
end program
If my_intrinsic isn't a supported intrinsic, then the compiler will complain with a helpful message:
Error: ‘my_intrinsic’ declared INTRINSIC at (1) does not exist
We don't have this problem with intrinsic functions because we are using implicit none:
implicit none
print *, my_intrinsic()
end
Error: Function ‘my_intrinsic’ at (1) has no IMPLICIT type
With some compilers we can use the Fortran 2018 implicit statement to do the same for subroutines
implicit none (external)
call my_intrinsic
end
Error: Procedure ‘my_intrinsic’ called at (1) is not explicitly declared
Note that it may be necessary to specify a compiler option when compiling to request the compiler support non-standard intrinsics (such as gfortran's -fdec-math). Equally, if you are requesting conformance to a particular language revision but using an intrinsic introduced in a later revision it may be necessary to change the conformance request. For example, compiling
intrinsic move_alloc
end
with gfortran and -std=f95:
intrinsic move_alloc
1
Error: The intrinsic ‘move_alloc’ declared INTRINSIC at (1) is not available in the current standard settings but new in Fortran 2003. Use an appropriate ‘-std=*’ option or enable ‘-fall-intrinsics’ in order to use it.
External procedure instead of module procedure
Just as we can try to use a module procedure in a program, but forget to give the object defining it to the linker, we can accidentally tell the compiler to use an external procedure (with a different link symbol name) instead of the module procedure:
module mod
implicit none
contains
integer function sub()
sub = 1
end function
end module
use mod, only :
implicit none
integer :: sub
print *, sub()
end
Or we could forget to use the module at all. Equally, we often see this when mistakenly referring to external procedures instead of sibling module procedures.
Using implicit none (external) can help us when we forget to use a module but this won't capture the case here where we explicitly declare the function to be an external one. We have to be careful, but if we see a link error like
undefined reference to `sub_'
then we should think we've referred to an external procedure sub instead of a module procedure: there's the absence of any name mangling for "module namespaces". That's a strong hint where we should be looking.
Mis-specified binding label
If we are interoperating with C then we can specify the link names of symbols incorrectly quite easily. It's so easy when not using the standard interoperability facility that I won't bother pointing this out. If you see link errors relating to what should be C functions, check carefully.
If using the standard facility there are still ways to trip up. Case sensitivity is one way: link symbol names are case sensitive, but your Fortran compiler has to be told the case if it's not all lower:
interface
function F() bind(c)
use, intrinsic :: iso_c_binding, only : c_int
integer(c_int) :: f
end function f
end interface
print *, F()
end
tells the Fortran compiler to ask the linker about a symbol f, even though we've called it F here. If the symbol really is called F, we need to say that explicitly:
interface
function F() bind(c, name='F')
use, intrinsic :: iso_c_binding, only : c_int
integer(c_int) :: f
end function f
end interface
print *, F()
end
If you see link errors which differ by case, check your binding labels.
The same holds for data objects with binding labels, and also make sure that any data object with linkage association has matching name in any C definition and link object.
Equally, forgetting to specify C interoperability with bind(c) means the linker may look for a mangled name with a trailing underscore or two (depending on compiler and its options). If you're trying to link against a C function cfunc but the linker complains about cfunc_, check you've said bind(c).
Not providing a main program
A compiler will often assume, unless told otherwise, that it's compiling a main program in order to generate (with the linker) an executable. If we aren't compiling a main program that's not what we want. That is, if we're compiling a module or external subprogram, for later use:
module mod
implicit none
contains
integer function f()
f = 1
end function f
end module
subroutine s()
end subroutine s
we may get a message like
undefined reference to `main'
This means that we need to tell the compiler that we aren't providing a Fortran main program. This will often be with the -c flag, but there will be a different option if trying to build a library object. The compiler documentation will give the appropriate options in this case.
There are many possible ways you can see an error like this. You may see it when trying to build your program (link error) or when running it (load error). Unfortunately, there's rarely a simple way to see which cause of your error you have.
This answer provides a summary of and links to the other answers to help you navigate. You may need to read all answers to solve your problem.
The most common cause of getting a link error like this is that you haven't correctly specified external dependencies or do not put all parts of your code together correctly.
When trying to run your program you may have a missing or incompatible runtime library.
If building fails and you have specified external dependencies, you may have a programming error which means that the compiler is looking for the wrong thing.
Not linking the library (properly)
The most common reason for the undefined reference/unresolved external symbol error is the failure to link the library that provides the symbol (most often a function or subroutine).
For example, when a subroutine from the BLAS library, like DGEMM is used, the library that provides this subroutine must be used in the linking step.
In the most simple use cases, the linking is combined with compilation:
gfortran my_source.f90 -lblas
The -lblas tells the linker (here invoked by the compiler) to link the libblas library. It can be a dynamic library (.so, .dll) or a static library (.a, .lib).
In many cases, it will be necessary to provide the library object defining the subroutine after the object requesting it. So, the linking above may succeed where switching the command line options (gfortran -lblas my_source.f90) may fail.
Note that the name of the library can be different as there are multiple implementations of BLAS (MKL, OpenBLAS, GotoBLAS,...).
But it will always be shortened from lib... to l... as in liopenblas.so and -lopenblas.
If the library is in a location where the linker does not see it, you can use the -L flag to explicitly add the directory for the linker to consider, e.g.:
gfortran -L/usr/local/lib -lopenblas
You can also try to add the path into some environment variable the linker searches, such as LIBRARY_PATH, e.g.:
export LIBRARY_PATH=$LIBRARY_PATH:/usr/local/lib
When linking and compilation are separated, the library is linked in the linking step:
gfortran -c my_source.f90 -o my_source.o
gfortran my_source.o -lblas
Not providing the module object file when linking
We have a module in a separate file module.f90 and the main program program.f90.
If we do
gfortran -c module.f90
gfortran program.f90 -o program
we receive an undefined reference error for the procedures contained in the module.
If we want to keep separate compilation steps, we need to link the compiled module object file
gfortran -c module.f90
gfortran module.o program.f90 -o program
or, when separating the linking step completely
gfortran -c module.f90
gfortran -c program.f90
gfortran module.o program.o -o program
Problems with the compiler's own libraries
Most Fortran compilers need to link your code against their own libraries. This should happen automatically without you needing to intervene, but this can fail for a number of reasons.
If you are compiling with gfortran, this problem will manifest as undefined references to symbols in libgfortran, which are all named _gfortran_.... These error messages will look like
undefined reference to '_gfortran_...'
The solution to this problem depends on its cause:
The compiler library is not installed
The compiler library should have been installed automatically when you installed the compiler. If the compiler did not install correctly, this may not have happened.
This can be solved by correctly installing the library, by correctly installing the compiler. It may be worth uninstalling the incorrectly installed compiler to avoid conflicts.
N.B. proceed with caution when uninstalling a compiler: if you uninstall the system compiler it may uninstall other necessary programs, and may render other programs unusable.
The compiler cannot find the compiler library
If the compiler library is installed in a non-standard location, the compiler may be unable to find it. You can tell the compiler where the library is using LD_LIBRARY_PATH, e.g. as
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH="/path/to/library:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH"
If you can't find the compiler library yourself, you may need to install a new copy.
The compiler and the compiler library are incompatible
If you have multiple versions of the compiler installed, you probably also have multiple versions of the compiler library installed. These may not be compatible, and the compiler might find the wrong library version.
This can be solved by pointing the compiler to the correct library version, e.g. by using LD_LIBRARY_PATH as above.
The Fortran compiler is not used for linking
If you are linking invoking the linker directly, or indirectly through a C (or other) compiler, then you may need to tell this compiler/linker to include the Fortran compiler's runtime library. For example, if using GCC's C frontend:
gcc -o program fortran_object.o c_object.o -lgfortran
I am trying to understand the preprocessor directives (like #if , #ifdef, #ifndef) and following is the code I have tried out.
Note: The member functions are further wrapped and used in python and hence the results show the python like calls but this does not affect any of the c++ process.
Question: 1. As per my understanding the global variables have a scope of whole file from the point it is declared. Then in this case, why is the defined value not accepted inside another function?
Requirement: I want to do something like mentioned below:
void Somefunc(int val){
set variable x;
}
Based on the x value, I want to include functions. Now the condition is:
If x=1, only some functions should be compiled since others utilize headers which would throw errors with the compiler I am using.
Thanks in advance!
Preprocessing runs before compilation. It handles the source code as plain text, it doesn't care for C++ language semantics.
The reason why var is not defined is that a preprocessor definition is valid from the point of definition until the end of the file (preprocessed translation unit) or a corresponding #undef.
I came across an interesting error when I was trying to link to an MSVC-compiled library using MinGW while working in Qt Creator. The linker complained of a missing symbol that went like _imp_FunctionName. When I realized That it was due to a missing extern "C", and fixed it, I also ran the MSVC compiler with /FAcs to see what the symbols are. Turns out, it was __imp_FunctionName (which is also the way I've read on MSDN and quite a few guru bloggers' sites).
I'm thoroughly confused about how the MinGW linker complains about a symbol beginning with _imp, but is able to find it nicely although it begins with __imp. Can a deep compiler magician shed some light on this? I used Visual Studio 2010.
This is fairly straight-forward identifier decoration at work. The imp_ prefix is auto-generated by the compiler, it exports a function pointer that allows optimizing binding to DLL exports. By language rules, the imp_ is prefixed by a leading underscore, required since it lives in the global namespace and is generated by the implementation and doesn't otherwise appear in the source code. So you get _imp_.
Next thing that happens is that the compiler decorates identifiers to allow the linker to catch declaration mis-matches. Pretty important because the compiler cannot diagnose declaration mismatches across modules and diagnosing them yourself at runtime is very painful.
First there's C++ decoration, a very involved scheme that supports function overloads. It generates pretty bizarre looking names, usually including lots of ? and # characters with extra characters for the argument and return types so that overloads are unambiguous. Then there's decoration for C identifiers, they are based on the calling convention. A cdecl function has a single leading underscore, an stdcall function has a leading underscore and a trailing #n that permits diagnosing argument declaration mismatches before they imbalance the stack. The C decoration is absent in 64-bit code, there is (blessfully) only one calling convention.
So you got the linker error because you forgot to specify C linkage, the linker was asked to match the heavily decorated C++ name with the mildly decorated C name. You then fixed it with extern "C", now you got the single added underscore for cdecl, turning _imp_ into __imp_.
I am working on a big Fortran 90 code, with a lot of modules. What bothers me is that when I modify the inner code of a function inside a module (without changing its mask), my Makefile (whose dependencies are based on "use") recompile every file that "use" that modified module, and recursively.
But when modifying the inner code of a function without touching its input/output, recompiling other files than the modified one is useless, no?
So I would like to separate the function declaration from their definition, like with the .h files in C or C++. What is the clean way to do this? Do I have to use Fortran include/preprocessor #include, or is there a "module/use" way of doing this?
I have tried something like this, but it seems to be quite nonsense...
main.f90
program prog
use foomod_header
integer :: i
bar=0
i=42
call foosub(i)
end program prog
foomod_header.f90
module foomod_header
integer :: bar
interface
subroutine foosub(i)
integer :: i
end subroutine
end interface
end module foomod_header
foomod.f90
module foomod
use foomod_header
contains
subroutine foosub(i)
integer ::i
print *,i+bar
end subroutine foosub
end module foomod
If submodules aren't an option (and they are ideal for this), then what you can do is make the procedure an external procedure and provide an interface for that procedure in a module. For example:
! Program.f90
PROGRAM p
USE Interfaces
IMPLICIT NONE
...
CALL SomeProcedure(xyz)
END PROGRAM p
! Interfaces.f90
MODULE Interfaces
IMPLICIT NONE
INTERFACE
SUBROUTINE SomeProcedure(some_arg)
USE SomeOtherModule
IMPLICIT NONE
TYPE(SomeType) :: some_arg
END SUBROUTINE SomeProcedure
END INTERFACE
END MODULE Interfaces
! SomeProcedure.f90
SUBROUTINE SomeProcedure(some_arg)
USE SomeOtherModule
IMPLICIT NONE
TYPE(SomeType) :: some_arg
...
END SUBROUTINE SomeProcedure
Some important notes:
There must only ever be one interface definition for a procedure accessible in a scope. Inside a subprogram the interface for the procedure defined by the subprogram is also considered defined - hence inside the subprogram you must not permit an interface block for procedures defined by the subprogram to be accessible. In terms of the example, this means that you must not have a USE Interfaces statement without an only clause inside the SomeProcedure external procedure.
If you do change the arguments or similar of the procedure inside SomeProcedure.f90 you had better make sure that you change the corresponding interface block inside the module!
If you can use F2003, the IMPORT statement can make life easier. Otherwise you might have to have additional modules (such as SomeOtherModule in the example) to share type definitions and the like between the Interfaces module and the external procedure.
If you have private entities or components relevant to the procedure then Fortran's rules entity and component accessibility may prevent you using this approach.
Typically some sort of whole program analysis is done at high levels of optimization. That analysis is typically much slower than the actual parsing of the code - splitting out procedures in this manner may not actually shorten build times significantly under these conditions.
Maybe the cleanest solution is to change the build system.
The real dependency introduced by a USE statement is not the source-code file, but the generated .mod file, which acts as a sort of "binary header file". I.e. where makefiles typically contain something like
MyProgram.o: MyModule.f90
what they really should contain is
MyProgram.o: MyModule.mod
MyModule.mod: MyModule.f90
with the creation of the .mod file being done in a way, that ensures an unchanged file-system timestamp, if the interface hasn't actually changed.
Sadly, compiler-support is awkward. Most compilers will overwrite the .mod file anyway, so the build process must at the same time detect, that the .mod file hasn't changed, e.g. by restoring the old modification time if the contents are unchanged, but at the same time needs to avoid recompiling the source file unnecessarily, which requires updating the modification time of the .mod file.
Additionally, some compilers (Intel, *cough*) add a binary time-stamp to the contents of the .mod files, that needs to be manually excluded from the comparison and has changed binary position across releases. This adds effort when supporting multiple compilers.
When compiling fortran code into object files: how does the compiler determine the symbol names?
when I use the intrinsic function "getarg" the compiler converts it into a symbol called "_getarg#12"
I looked in the external libraries and found that the symbol name inside is called "_getarg#16" what is the significance of the "#[number]" at the end of "getarg" ?
_name#length is highly Windows-specific name mangling applied to the name of routines that obey the stdcall (or __stdcall by the name of the keyword used in C) calling convention, a variant of the Pascal calling convention. This is the calling convention used by all Win32 API functions and if you look at the export tables of DLLs like KERNEL32.DLL and USER32.DLL you'd see that all symbols are named like this.
The _...#length decoration gives the number of bytes occupied by the routine arguments. This is necessary since in the stdcall calling conventions it is the callee who cleans up the arguments from the stack and not the caller as is the case with the C calling convention. When the compiler generates a call to func with two 4-byte arguments, it puts a reference to _func#8 in the object code. If the real func happens to have different number or size of arguments, its decorated name would be something different, e.g. _func#12 and hence a link error would occur. This is very useful with dynamic libraries (DLLs). Imagine that a DLL was replaced with another version where func takes one additional argument. If it wasn't for the name mangling (the technical term for prepending _ and adding #length to the symbol name), the program would still call into func with the wrong arguments and then func would increment the stack pointer with more bytes than was the size of the passed argument list, thus breaking the caller. With name mangling in place the loader would not launch the executable at all since it would not be able to resolve the reference to _func#8.
In your case it looks like the external library is not really intended to be used with this compiler or you are missing some pragma or compiler option. The getarg intrinsic takes two arguments - one integer and one assumed-sized character array (string). Some compilers pass the character array size as an additional argument. With 32-bit code this would result in 2 pointers and 1 integer being passed, totalling in 12 bytes of arguments, hence the _getarg#12. The _getarg#16 could be, for example, 64-bit routine with strings being passed by some kind of descriptor.
As IanH reminded me in his comment, another reason for this naming discrepancy could be that you are calling getarg with fewer arguments than expected. Fortran has this peculiar feature of "prototypeless" routine calls - Fortran compilers can generate calls to routines without actually knowing their signature, unlike in C/C++ where an explicit signature has to be supplied in the form of a function prototype. This is possible since in Fortran all arguments are passed by reference and pointers are always the same size, no matter the actual type they point to. In this particular case the stdcall name mangling plays the role of a very crude argument checking mechanism. If it wasn't for the mangling (e.g. on Linux with GNU Fortran where such decorations are not employed or if the default calling convention was cdecl) one could call a routine with different number of arguments than expected and the linker would happily link the object code into an executable that would then most likely crash at run time.
This is totally implementation dependent. You did not say, which compiler do you use. The (nonstandard) intrinsic can exist in more versions for different integer or character kinds. There can also be more versions of the runtime libraries for more computer architectures (e.g. 32 bit and 64 bit).