Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!


  Search this Thread
Old 12-11-2014, 09:21 PM   #16
LQ Guru
Registered: Nov 2010
Location: Colorado
Distribution: OpenSUSE, CentOS
Posts: 5,573

Rep: Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137Reputation: 2137

Unless the forward and reverse algorithms are corrupted in the same way. You should do an independent verification using another set of tools. Most languages have an FFT library of some kind, you could even write a quick C wrapper for fftw3, I've used it before and it's pretty straight forward. You could probably even use GDL or Octave (free "approximations" of IDL and Matlab respectively), or python, etc.

The only reason I'm harping on this so much is because I'm about 99% sure that your solution for the compilation problem will break the code. Not programatically, but mathematically. It seems to me that the original developer was probably a C programmer who was branching out into Fortran, and wrote those function calls like he would have in C, which means passing the memory location of the index in the array at which you want to start, and letting the function increment from there. Fortran doesn't work that way, at least not naturally. He probably kluged together some syntax that let his specific compiler behave as he wanted, but it was not ANSI, and of course breaks as soon as the compiler changes. The focus here isn't to get your compiler to build the code without complaint, it's to get your compiler to build the code in the way that the original developer intended, and simply removing the index offset in the function calls is almost certainly not the right answer.

Last edited by suicidaleggroll; 12-11-2014 at 09:22 PM.
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 12-13-2014, 11:46 AM   #17
Registered: Mar 2014
Posts: 464

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Thank you for your intricate analysis. I am alert to all options, including to what you are saying. It is a huge task for me to wade through so much code with variants of FFT methods. Might take time but I will crack it. My task is even more complicated by the fact that I need to do 2-D transform and the other dimension is not FFT, although the variables are separatable. I truly value your contributions. Thanks, - A.


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I don't understand why log timestamps are UTC but date command is local time Rogue45 Linux - Newbie 5 07-19-2013 04:39 PM
Don't understand dependency error johngcarlsson Linux - Newbie 2 05-29-2008 07:49 PM
I don't understand this error FowlProgrammer Linux - Newbie 4 02-18-2007 08:42 AM
Gfortran compile error aukuntin Linux From Scratch 2 01-28-2007 09:08 PM
I want Linux but at the same time I don't. Just read and you'll understand. simeandrews Linux - Newbie 27 12-18-2004 09:00 AM > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:30 PM.

Main Menu
Write for LQ is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration