Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Fortran-interface routines - FFTW 3.3.3 Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10:
Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10:

Chris@10: Next: , Chris@10: Previous: Calling FFTW from Legacy Fortran, Chris@10: Up: Calling FFTW from Legacy Fortran Chris@10:


Chris@10:
Chris@10: Chris@10:

8.1 Fortran-interface routines

Chris@10: Chris@10:

Nearly all of the FFTW functions have Fortran-callable equivalents. Chris@10: The name of the legacy Fortran routine is the same as that of the Chris@10: corresponding C routine, but with the ‘fftw_’ prefix replaced by Chris@10: ‘dfftw_’.1 The single and long-double precision Chris@10: versions use ‘sfftw_’ and ‘lfftw_’, respectively, instead of Chris@10: ‘fftwf_’ and ‘fftwl_’; quadruple precision (real*16) Chris@10: is available on some systems as ‘fftwq_’ (see Precision). Chris@10: (Note that long double on x86 hardware is usually at most Chris@10: 80-bit extended precision, not quadruple precision.) Chris@10: Chris@10:

For the most part, all of the arguments to the functions are the same, Chris@10: with the following exceptions: Chris@10: Chris@10:

Chris@10: Chris@10:

In general, you should take care to use Fortran data types that Chris@10: correspond to (i.e. are the same size as) the C types used by FFTW. Chris@10: In practice, this correspondence is usually straightforward Chris@10: (i.e. integer corresponds to int, real Chris@10: corresponds to float, etcetera). The native Fortran Chris@10: double/single-precision complex type should be compatible with Chris@10: fftw_complex/fftwf_complex. Such simple correspondences Chris@10: are assumed in the examples below. Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10:

Chris@10:
Chris@10:

Footnotes

[1] Technically, Fortran 77 identifiers are not Chris@10: allowed to have more than 6 characters, nor may they contain Chris@10: underscores. Any compiler that enforces this limitation doesn't Chris@10: deserve to link to FFTW.

Chris@10: Chris@10:

[2] The Chris@10: reason for this is that some Fortran implementations seem to have Chris@10: trouble with C function return values, and vice versa.

Chris@10: Chris@10:
Chris@10: Chris@10: Chris@10: