I am using procedure overloading and interfaces in order to achieve some sort of genericity in a Fortran program.
For this, I have a module which contains a number of procedures, all duplicated in order to be able to change the variable types. I also have at the beginning of the module, a series of interfaces of the type:
interface norm
module procedure &
norm_r8, &
norm_c
end interface
Now my problem is that I am trying to reference norm using a procedure pointer, as such (in a different module):
procedure(), POINTER :: pNorm => NULL()
pNorm => norm
However, in this situation, gfortran gives me an error saying that I have an undefined reference to norm. If I point to norm_r8 or norm_c, no problem. But since the part of the code that assigns the pointer is not aware of the type of the variables that will be used when norm is called, I need to point to the generic name! Is there a way to point towards an overloaded procedure?
As far as I can tell, a procedure pointer is not allowed to point at a generic interface. The standard only mentions procedures with the EXTERNAL attribute, a module procedures, or certain intrinsic procedures may be associated with a procedure pointer (C1220, ISO/IEC 1539-1:2010). Gfortran also issues a helpful error message for your case:
Error: Procedure pointer target 'norm' at (1) must be either an intrinsic,
host or use associated, referenced or have the EXTERNAL attribute
It also makes sense that you cannot associate to an interface, but only a procedure. An interface is only used in the procedure(INTERFACE) statement to give an explicit interface to the procedures it can point at.
This shouldn't be a showstopper for you, as the purpose of a generic interface can negate your need for a pointer. As long as all potential calls the pointer would be used for are unique in type, kind, rank and number of arguments (so the compiler can differentiate between them), you can just add all of them to a single generic interface and call that in lieu of the pointer. Alternatively you could use a select type() construct to selectively associate your pointer with the specific procedure for your type to avoid needing to associate with a generic interface.
Here is an example of a wrapper procedure to assign the pointer to a specific procedure based on an argument type
subroutine get_proc_ptr(pp, arg)
implicit none
procedure(), pointer, intent(out) :: pp
class(*), intent(inout) :: arg
select type(arg)
type is (real(kind=kind(1d0)))
pp => norm_r8
type is (real)
pp => norm_r
type is (integer)
pp => norm_i
type is (complex)
pp => norm_c
class default
pp => null()
end select
end subroutine
Which can be made use of like this:
real(kind=kind(1d0)) :: arg_r8
procedure(), pointer :: pNorm => null()
arg_r8 = 4.0123456789d30
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_r8)
call pNorm(arg_r8)
Here is a complete compilable example:
module proc
implicit none
interface norm
module procedure &
norm_r8, &
norm_r, &
norm_i, &
norm_c
end interface
contains
subroutine norm_r8(arg)
implicit none
real(kind=kind(1d0)), intent(in) :: arg
write (*,*) "real8: ", arg
end subroutine
subroutine norm_r(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
write (*,*) "real: ", arg
end subroutine
subroutine norm_i(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
write (*,*) "integer: ", arg
end subroutine
subroutine norm_c(arg)
implicit none
complex, intent(in) :: arg
write (*,*) "complex: ", arg
end subroutine
subroutine get_proc_ptr(pp, arg)
implicit none
procedure(), pointer, intent(out) :: pp
class(*), intent(inout) :: arg
select type(arg)
type is (real(kind=kind(1d0)))
pp => norm_r8
type is (real)
pp => norm_r
type is (integer)
pp => norm_i
type is (complex)
pp => norm_c
class default
pp => null()
end select
end subroutine
end module
program test
use proc
implicit none
real(kind=kind(1d0)) :: arg_r8
real :: arg_r
integer :: arg_i
complex :: arg_c
procedure(), pointer :: pNorm => null()
arg_r8 = 4.0123456789d30
arg_r = 12.5
arg_i = 56
arg_c = (34,3)
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_r8)
call pNorm(arg_r8)
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_r)
call pNorm(arg_r)
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_i)
call pNorm(arg_i)
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_c)
call pNorm(arg_c)
end program
And here is the output of this program:
$ ./testprocptr
real8: 4.0123456788999999E+030
real: 12.5000000
integer: 56
complex: ( 34.0000000 , 3.00000000 )
If I understand well, you want to achieve two things at one time.
First, you want to use polymorphism to let the compiler call the correct routine dependent on whether you have a different type, rank, number of arguments etcetera.
Second, you want to use procedure pointers to switch between different procedures that have the same interface.
I tried the same. I did not manage to set a pointer to an interface, but I managed to make an interface with pointers.
If you have a module like this
module some_module
! This is the abstract interface for procedure pointers.
interface
subroutine shape_1_interface(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
end subroutine shape_1_interface
subroutine shape_2_interface(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
end subroutine shape_2_interface
end interface
contains
subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_1(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is real",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 1"
end subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_1
subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_1(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is int",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 1"
end subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_1
subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_2(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is real",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 2"
end subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_2
subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_2(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is int",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 2"
end subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_2
subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_3(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is real",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 3"
end subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_3
subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_3(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is int",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 3"
end subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_3
end module some_module
then you can do in your main program:
program main
use some_module
implicit none
procedure(shape_1_interface), pointer :: routine_shape_1
procedure(shape_2_interface), pointer :: routine_shape_2
interface routine
procedure routine_shape_1
procedure routine_shape_2
end interface routine
routine_shape_1 => routine_shape_1_implementation_1
routine_shape_2 => routine_shape_2_implementation_1
call routine(4)
routine_shape_1 => routine_shape_1_implementation_2
routine_shape_2 => routine_shape_2_implementation_2
call routine(4.0)
end program main
It is a pity that when you want to set the pointers to a different implementation, you have to do that for all shapes, but the good thing is that you can just call 'routine' and you automatically get the desired function.
This is the output:
Arg is int 4
Implementation 1
Arg is real 4.00000000000000
Implementation 2
Related
In Fortran, it is not possible to make a member variable of a derived type a target. (I guess this has to do with the standard not specifying how a derived type is stored in memory?) However, I can have a pointer as a member variable and associate pointers with pointers. Like I do in the example below.
module DataMod
type DataType
real(8), private, dimension(:,:), pointer, contiguous :: A
real(8), private, dimension(:,:), pointer, contiguous :: B
integer :: n
contains
procedure :: alloc
procedure :: set
procedure :: print_
final :: dealloc
end type DataType
interface DataType
procedure :: NewDataType
end interface DataType
contains
function NewDataType(dimension_) result(new)
integer, intent(in) :: dimension_
type(DataType) :: new
new%n = dimension_
end function NewDataType
subroutine alloc(dataObject)
class(DataType) :: dataObject
allocate(dataObject%A(dataObject%n,dataObject%n))
allocate(dataObject%B(dataObject%n,dataObject%n))
end subroutine alloc
subroutine set(dataObject, datas, choice)
class(DataType) :: dataObject
real(8), dimension(dataObject%n,dataObject%n), intent(in) :: datas
character(len=1), intent(in) :: choice
real(8), dimension(:,:), pointer :: dataPointer
integer :: i,j
if(choice .eq. 'A') then
datapointer => dataObject%A
elseif(choice .eq. 'B') then
datapointer => dataObject%B
else
stop
endif
do j = 1,dataObject%n
do i = 1,dataObject%n
datapointer(i,j) = datas(i,j)
enddo
enddo
end subroutine set
subroutine print_(dataObject)
class(DataType), intent(in) :: dataObject
print *, 'A'
print *, dataObject%A(1:dataObject%n,1:dataObject%n)
print *
print *, 'B'
print *, dataObject%B(1:dataObject%n,1:dataObject%n)
end subroutine print_
subroutine dealloc(dataObject)
type(DataType) :: dataObject
deallocate(dataObject%A)
deallocate(dataObject%B)
end subroutine dealloc
end module DataMod
program DataTest
use DataMod, only: DataType
implicit none
real(8), dimension(2,2) :: testArray
type(DataType) :: testType
testType = DataType(2)
call testType%alloc()
testArray(1,1) = 1
testArray(2,1) = 2
testArray(1,2) = 3
testArray(2,2) = 4
call testType%set(testArray, 'A')
testArray(1,1) = 5
testArray(2,1) = 6
testArray(1,2) = 7
testArray(2,2) = 8
call testType%set(testArray, 'B')
call testType%print_()
end program DataTest
In the set routine, I use an if statement to set a pointer to decide if it should dump the incoming matrix in A or B. In the program I'm currently working on, I must decide which combination of four different matrices to multiply together and setting a pair of pointers is much nicer than writing 16 almost identical calls to dgemm.
My question is if there are any problems with this approach besides the normal dangers of dangling pointers etc. or a way to do this without pointers? The arrays should not be accessed from outside the object. Are there any performance issues?
Components in a type definition may not be declared with the TARGET attribute (beyond the missing syntax, that would be inconsistent with other concepts and rules in the current language), but if a variable of derived type has the TARGET attribute, then all of its subobjects have the TARGET attribute too. For a type definition:
type DataType
real(8), private, dimension(:,:), allocatable :: A
real(8), private, dimension(:,:), allocatable :: B
...
The procedure set could be written...
subroutine set(dataObject, datas, choice)
class(DataType), TARGET :: dataObject
real(8), dimension(dataObject%n,dataObject%n), intent(in) :: datas
character(len=1), intent(in) :: choice
real(8), dimension(:,:), pointer :: dataPointer
! require dataobject%A and ..%B to already be allocated.
if(choice .eq. 'A') then
datapointer => dataObject%A
elseif(choice .eq. 'B') then
datapointer => dataObject%B
else
stop
endif
datapointer = datas ! or some other operation.
...
(dataPointer could be declared contiguous, the allocatable arrays that it gets pointed at are always contiguous.)
An actual argument without the TARGET attribute may be associated with a dummy argument with the TARGET attribute. If this is the case, then pointers associated with the dummy argument become undefined when execution of the procedure completes. (Such pointers may also become undefined in some cases, even when the actual argument has the TARGET attribute - see F2018 15.5.2.4p8 on for details - but these cases don't apply to scalars.)
Consequently, in the general case, if a pointer to one of the components of an object of derived type needs to outlive a procedure like set above (e.g. if dataPointer was not local to set) and you can't ensure that the actual argument will always have the TARGET attribute, then the original method using pointer components may be more appropriate. The implementation in the question appears to be ok - though I would suggest making the finalizer IMPURE ELEMENTAL to make things more robust to future changes.
I want to overload the assignment for a type that I want to use for polymorphic pointers. I dont know the actual subtype the pointer is holding on runtime.
But the following example code reproduces the strange compiler error I get:
module example
type :: base_class
real(4) :: some_garbage
contains
end type
type, extends(base_class) :: sub_class
real(4) :: even_more_garbage
contains
end type
type :: main_operations_t
class(base_class), pointer :: basic_pointer
class(base_class), pointer :: pointer_array(:)
contains
procedure :: main_operations
end type
interface assignment(=)
module procedure assign_base_class
end interface
contains
subroutine assign_base_class(result_object, input_object)
implicit none
class(base_class), pointer, intent(out) :: result_object
class(base_class), pointer, intent(in) :: input_object
result_object%some_garbage = input_object%some_garbage
end subroutine
subroutine main_operations(this)
implicit none
class(main_operations_t) :: this
class(base_class), pointer :: hack
allocate(this%basic_pointer)
allocate(this%pointer_array(2))
this%basic_pointer%some_garbage = 0.0
this%pointer_array(1)%some_garbage = 1.0
this%pointer_array(2)%some_garbage = 2.0
this%basic_pointer = this%pointer_array(1)
this%pointer_array(1) = this%pointer_array(2)
this%pointer_array(2) = this%basic_pointer
this%basic_pointer = this%pointer_array(1)
hack => this%pointer_array(1)
hack = this%pointer_array(2)
hack => this%pointer_array(2)
hack = this%basic_pointer
end subroutine
end module
When I try to assign to the indexed pointer array i.e
this%pointer_array(1) = this%pointer_array(2)
this%pointer_array(2) = this%basic_pointer
I use gfortran 4.8.4 on Ubuntu.
I get a compiler error:
Error: Variable must not be polymorphic in intrinsic assignment at (1) - check that there is a matching specific subroutine for '=' operator
The assignment to the 0d pointer however works without complaints.
The section with the "hack" pointer shows a possible workaround to get this to work in an ugly manner.
The compiler is complaining it needs a defined assignment. You do have one, but it requires pointers:
subroutine assign_base_class(result_object, input_object)
class(base_class), pointer, intent(out) :: result_object
class(base_class), pointer, intent(in) :: input_object
(It is not necessary to repeat implicit none in all module procedures. I'd argue it is a clutter which harms readability.)
And your variables are not pointers. pointer_array(1) is NOT a pointer even though pointer_array is a pointer.
A solution is to remove the unneeded pointer attribute:
subroutine assign_base_class(result_object, input_object)
class(base_class), intent(out) :: result_object
class(base_class), intent(in) :: input_object
result_object%some_garbage = input_object%some_garbage
end subroutine
This compiles cleanly.
It would make sense to have the pointer attribute there if you were doing pointer assignment, but as it stands, there is no use of it in the defined assignment.
I am using procedure overloading and interfaces in order to achieve some sort of genericity in a Fortran program.
For this, I have a module which contains a number of procedures, all duplicated in order to be able to change the variable types. I also have at the beginning of the module, a series of interfaces of the type:
interface norm
module procedure &
norm_r8, &
norm_c
end interface
Now my problem is that I am trying to reference norm using a procedure pointer, as such (in a different module):
procedure(), POINTER :: pNorm => NULL()
pNorm => norm
However, in this situation, gfortran gives me an error saying that I have an undefined reference to norm. If I point to norm_r8 or norm_c, no problem. But since the part of the code that assigns the pointer is not aware of the type of the variables that will be used when norm is called, I need to point to the generic name! Is there a way to point towards an overloaded procedure?
As far as I can tell, a procedure pointer is not allowed to point at a generic interface. The standard only mentions procedures with the EXTERNAL attribute, a module procedures, or certain intrinsic procedures may be associated with a procedure pointer (C1220, ISO/IEC 1539-1:2010). Gfortran also issues a helpful error message for your case:
Error: Procedure pointer target 'norm' at (1) must be either an intrinsic,
host or use associated, referenced or have the EXTERNAL attribute
It also makes sense that you cannot associate to an interface, but only a procedure. An interface is only used in the procedure(INTERFACE) statement to give an explicit interface to the procedures it can point at.
This shouldn't be a showstopper for you, as the purpose of a generic interface can negate your need for a pointer. As long as all potential calls the pointer would be used for are unique in type, kind, rank and number of arguments (so the compiler can differentiate between them), you can just add all of them to a single generic interface and call that in lieu of the pointer. Alternatively you could use a select type() construct to selectively associate your pointer with the specific procedure for your type to avoid needing to associate with a generic interface.
Here is an example of a wrapper procedure to assign the pointer to a specific procedure based on an argument type
subroutine get_proc_ptr(pp, arg)
implicit none
procedure(), pointer, intent(out) :: pp
class(*), intent(inout) :: arg
select type(arg)
type is (real(kind=kind(1d0)))
pp => norm_r8
type is (real)
pp => norm_r
type is (integer)
pp => norm_i
type is (complex)
pp => norm_c
class default
pp => null()
end select
end subroutine
Which can be made use of like this:
real(kind=kind(1d0)) :: arg_r8
procedure(), pointer :: pNorm => null()
arg_r8 = 4.0123456789d30
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_r8)
call pNorm(arg_r8)
Here is a complete compilable example:
module proc
implicit none
interface norm
module procedure &
norm_r8, &
norm_r, &
norm_i, &
norm_c
end interface
contains
subroutine norm_r8(arg)
implicit none
real(kind=kind(1d0)), intent(in) :: arg
write (*,*) "real8: ", arg
end subroutine
subroutine norm_r(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
write (*,*) "real: ", arg
end subroutine
subroutine norm_i(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
write (*,*) "integer: ", arg
end subroutine
subroutine norm_c(arg)
implicit none
complex, intent(in) :: arg
write (*,*) "complex: ", arg
end subroutine
subroutine get_proc_ptr(pp, arg)
implicit none
procedure(), pointer, intent(out) :: pp
class(*), intent(inout) :: arg
select type(arg)
type is (real(kind=kind(1d0)))
pp => norm_r8
type is (real)
pp => norm_r
type is (integer)
pp => norm_i
type is (complex)
pp => norm_c
class default
pp => null()
end select
end subroutine
end module
program test
use proc
implicit none
real(kind=kind(1d0)) :: arg_r8
real :: arg_r
integer :: arg_i
complex :: arg_c
procedure(), pointer :: pNorm => null()
arg_r8 = 4.0123456789d30
arg_r = 12.5
arg_i = 56
arg_c = (34,3)
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_r8)
call pNorm(arg_r8)
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_r)
call pNorm(arg_r)
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_i)
call pNorm(arg_i)
call get_proc_ptr(pNorm, arg_c)
call pNorm(arg_c)
end program
And here is the output of this program:
$ ./testprocptr
real8: 4.0123456788999999E+030
real: 12.5000000
integer: 56
complex: ( 34.0000000 , 3.00000000 )
If I understand well, you want to achieve two things at one time.
First, you want to use polymorphism to let the compiler call the correct routine dependent on whether you have a different type, rank, number of arguments etcetera.
Second, you want to use procedure pointers to switch between different procedures that have the same interface.
I tried the same. I did not manage to set a pointer to an interface, but I managed to make an interface with pointers.
If you have a module like this
module some_module
! This is the abstract interface for procedure pointers.
interface
subroutine shape_1_interface(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
end subroutine shape_1_interface
subroutine shape_2_interface(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
end subroutine shape_2_interface
end interface
contains
subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_1(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is real",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 1"
end subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_1
subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_1(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is int",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 1"
end subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_1
subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_2(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is real",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 2"
end subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_2
subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_2(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is int",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 2"
end subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_2
subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_3(arg)
implicit none
real, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is real",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 3"
end subroutine routine_shape_1_implementation_3
subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_3(arg)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: arg
write(*,*) "Arg is int",arg
write(*,*) "Implementation 3"
end subroutine routine_shape_2_implementation_3
end module some_module
then you can do in your main program:
program main
use some_module
implicit none
procedure(shape_1_interface), pointer :: routine_shape_1
procedure(shape_2_interface), pointer :: routine_shape_2
interface routine
procedure routine_shape_1
procedure routine_shape_2
end interface routine
routine_shape_1 => routine_shape_1_implementation_1
routine_shape_2 => routine_shape_2_implementation_1
call routine(4)
routine_shape_1 => routine_shape_1_implementation_2
routine_shape_2 => routine_shape_2_implementation_2
call routine(4.0)
end program main
It is a pity that when you want to set the pointers to a different implementation, you have to do that for all shapes, but the good thing is that you can just call 'routine' and you automatically get the desired function.
This is the output:
Arg is int 4
Implementation 1
Arg is real 4.00000000000000
Implementation 2
I want to use a fortran program in R, but I get errors when running the R program.
The fortran code has REAL variables with 2 dimensions. A test code for fortran looks like:
test_inside_program.f90:
program testprogram
implicit none
interface
SUBROUTINE testm(testvar, thelength)
IMPLICIT NONE
REAL, INTENT(IN), DIMENSION(:) :: testvar
INTEGER, INTENT(IN) :: thelength
END SUBROUTINE testm
end interface
REAL, DIMENSION(:),ALLOCATABLE :: testvar
INTEGER :: i
allocate(testvar(3))
DO i = 1,2
testvar(i) = i
ENDDO
call testm(testvar, 3)
write(*,*) 'program finished'
end program testprogram
SUBROUTINE testm(testvar,thelength)
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER, INTENT(IN) :: thelength
REAL, INTENT(IN), DIMENSION(:) :: testvar
write(*,*) 'program cont. X'
write(*,*)' THe testvar 1st variable is', testvar
END SUBROUTINE testm
I want to call the subroutine testm from R.
Of course I would like to maintain the dimensions.
Therefore I generated following test code in R:
test.r
dyn.load("test_inside_program.so")
is.loaded("testm")
dd <- c(5,2,3)
.Fortran("testm",as.single(dd),as.integer(3))
I would appreciate your help!
I generate the .so with
R CMD SHLIB test_inside_program.f90
You can't declare an assumed shape array here, since R won't know how to pass such an array (it's not just a pointer to data, it must come together with dimensions).
This will work:
subroutine testm(testvar,thelength)
implicit none
integer, intent(in) :: thelength
real, intent(in), dimension(thelength) :: testvar
write(*,*) 'program cont. x'
write(*,*) 'length=', thelength
write(*,*) 'testvar=', testvar
end subroutine testm
Also, depending on your needs, you may consider declaring double precision arrays in your program and passing them "as is" from R (it's the default numeric type). For integers, you may also write 3L directly in R, thus, for single and double, it goes like this:
.Fortran("testm", as.single(dd), 3L)
.Fortran("testm", dd, 3L)
Okay, problem solved!
subroutines in fortran:
SUBROUTINE testm(testvar, thelength)
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER, INTENT(IN) :: thelength
REAL, INTENT(IN), DIMENSION(thelength) :: testvar
END SUBROUTINE testm
in R
dd <- c(5.5,2,3.3)
#length(dd)
print("call fortran routine")
.Fortran("testm",as.single(dd),as.integer(3))
I dont know why it did not work before :o
In a Fortran module, I'm trying to assign initial value to a derived data type whose component is a procedure pointer, but get an error message: unexpected pointer assignment.
In a module, how to assign initial value to a derived type containing a procedure pointer?
module pointer_mod
use legendrePolynomials
implicit none
interface
function func (z)
real*8 :: func
real*8, intent (in) :: z
end function func
end interface
type proc_ptr
procedure (func), pointer, nopass :: f_ptr
end type proc_ptr
type(proc_ptr), dimension(6) :: basis
basis(1) % f_ptr => Legendre0 ! or basis(1) % f_ptr => null()
end module pointer_mod
where:
function Legendre0(x) result(y)
real, intent(in) :: x
real :: y
y = 1
end function
You get the error message, because you issue an pointer assignment outside of any subroutines, where usually only declarations should occur. Putting the assignment in a subroutine (see below) shows, that things work perfectly, provided you make sure, the Legendre0() function also use real*8 type in order to match the interface declaration (for testing purposes, I also put the Legendre function in the same module):
module pointer_mod
implicit none
interface
function func (z)
real*8 :: func
real*8, intent (in) :: z
end function func
end interface
type proc_ptr
procedure (func), pointer, nopass :: f_ptr
end type proc_ptr
type(proc_ptr), dimension(6) :: basis
contains
subroutine test()
basis(1)%f_ptr => Legendre0 ! or basis(1) % f_ptr => null()
end subroutine test
function Legendre0(x) result(y)
real*8, intent(in) :: x
real*8 :: y
y = 1
end function Legendre0
end module pointer_mod
As an additional comment: You should consider to declare your real variables like
integer, parameter :: dp = kind(1.0d0)
real(dp) :: whatever
instead of the real*8 notation, which is obsolate.
Another solution would be to make the function pointer of Legendre0 the default for all variables of type(proc_ptr).
type proc_ptr
procedure (func), pointer, nopass :: f_ptr => Legendre0
end type proc_ptr
But that's probably not what you want because you're handling an array of pointers.