Reshaping 1d array to 2D pointer array Fortran - pointers

I have a pointer uvw(:,:) which is two-dimensional, and I got a 1d buffer array x(:).
Now I need to point uvw(1,:)=>x(1:ncell) and uvw(2,:)=>x(ncell+1:ncell*2) etc.
I made a very simple example. I know that array of pointers does not work, but does anybody have an idea how this can be worked around?
PS: For a pragmatic reason I do not want to wrap my uvw with a declared type. ( i am changing some bit of code, and need uvw as 2D pointer. Currently is an array, and my idea is to avoid changing the way uvw is being used as it being used thousands of times)
program test
real, allocatable,target :: x(:)
real, pointer :: ptr(:,:)
allocate(x(100) )
x = 1.
ptr(1,:) => x(1:10)
end program
The error message says:
`error #8524: The syntax of this data pointer assignment is incorrect:
either 'bound spec' or 'bound remapping' is expected in this context.
[1]
ptr(1,:) => x(1:10)
----^`

You are trying to perform pointer bounds remapping, but you have the incorrect syntax and approach.
Pointer bounds remapping is a way to have the shape of the pointer different from that of the target. In particular, the rank of the pointer and target may differ. However, in such an assignment it is necessary to explicitly specify the lower and upper bounds of the remapping; it isn't sufficient to use : by itself.
Also, you'll need to assign the whole pointer in one go. That is, you can't have "the first ten elements point to this slice, the next ten to this slice" and so on in multiple statements.
The assignment statement would be
ptr(1:10,1:10) => x
Note, that this also means that you can't actually have what you want. You are asking for the elements ptr(1,1:10) to correspond to x(1:10) and ptr(2,2:10) to correspond to x(11:20). That isn't possible: the array elements must match in order: ptr(1:10,1) being the first ten elements of ptr must instead be associated with the first ten elements x(1:10). The corrected pointer assignment above has this.

If you prefer avoiding a pointer, then the UNION/MAP is an option depending on compiler. It was added to gfortran a while ago... then you can think of the array as a rank=2 but also use the vector (Rank=1) for SIMD operations.
All this assumes that one wants to avoid pointers...

Related

How to check if a variable is scalar in julia

I would like to check if a variable is scalar in julia, such as Integer, String, Number, but not AstractArray, Tuple, type, struct, etc. Is there a simple method to do this (i.e. isscalar(x))
The notion of what is, or is not a scalar is under-defined without more context.
Mathematically, a scalar is defined; (Wikipedia)
A scalar is an element of a field which is used to define a vector space.
That is to say, you need to define a vector space, based on a field, before you can determine if something is, or is not a scalar (relative to that vector space.).
For the right vector space, tuples could be a scalar.
Of-course we are not looking for a mathematically rigorous definition.
Just a pragmatic one.
Base it off what Broadcasting considers to be scalar
I suggest that the only meaningful way in which a scalar can be defined in julia, is of the behavior of broadcast.
As of Julia 1:
using Base.Broadcast
isscalar(x::T) where T = isscalar(T)
isscalar(::Type{T}) where T = BroadcastStyle(T) isa Broadcast.DefaultArrayStyle{0}
See the docs for Broadcast.
In julia 0.7, Scalar is the default. So it is basically anything that doesn't have specific broadcasting behavior, i.e. it knocks out things like array and tuples etc.:
using Base.Broadcast
isscalar(x::T) where T = isscalar(T)
isscalar(::Type{T}) where T = BroadcastStyle(T) isa Broadcast.Scalar
In julia 0.6 this is a bit more messy, but similar:
isscalar(x::T) where T = isscalar(T)
isscalar(::Type{T}) where T = Base.Broadcast._containertype(T)===Any
The advantage of using the methods for Broadcast to determine if something is scalar, over using your own methods, is that anyone making a new type that is going to act in a scalar way must make sure it works with those methods correctly
(or actually nonscalar since scalar is the default.)
Structs are not not scalar
That is to say: sometimes structs are scalar and sometimes they are not and it depends on the struct.
Note however that these methods do not consider struct to be non-scalar.
I think you are mistaken in your desire to.
Julia structs are not (necessarily or usually) a collection type.
Consider that: BigInteger, BigFloat, Complex128 etc etc
are all defined using structs
I was tempted to say that having a start method makes a type nonscalar, but that would be incorrect as start(::Number) is defined.
(This has been debated a few times)
For completeness, I am copying Tasos Papastylianou's answer from the comments to here. If all you want to do is distinguish scalars from arrays you can use:
isa(x, Number)
This will output true if x is a Number (like a float or an int), and output false if x is an Array (vector, matrix, etc.)
I found myself needing to capture the notion of if something was scalar or not recently in MultiResolutionIterators.jl.
I found the boardcasting based rules from the other answer,
did not meet my needs.
In particular I wanted to consider strings as nonscalar.
I defined a trait,
bases on method_exists(start, (T,)),
with some exceptions as mentioned e.g. for Number.
abstract type Scalarness end
struct Scalar <: Scalarness end
struct NotScalar <: Scalarness end
isscalar(::Type{Any}) = NotScalar() # if we don't know the type we can't really know if scalar or not
isscalar(::Type{<:AbstractString}) = NotScalar() # We consider strings to be nonscalar
isscalar(::Type{<:Number}) = Scalar() # We consider Numbers to be scalar
isscalar(::Type{Char}) = Scalar() # We consider Sharacter to be scalar
isscalar(::Type{T}) where T = method_exists(start, (T,)) ? NotScalar() : Scalar()
Something similar is also done by AbstractTrees.jl
isscalar(x) == applicable(start, x) && !isa(x, Integer) && !isa(x, Char) && !isa(x, Task)

Integer matrix in stan getting flattened

I'm trying to pass a three-dimensional data structure to Stan (in RStan) where the entries must be integers, because a function down-stream requires that. However I'm having trouble declaring it.
I tried the straight-forward approach:
int x[n,n,k];
But that gave me the error
mismatch in number dimensions declared and found in context; ... dims declared=(n,n,k); dims found=(n*n*k)
meaning, clearly, the input array is getting flattened, for some reason (that I don't understand). I'm giving it a simple 3d array, no NAs, the dimensions look right before I pass it. And in fact, the same things is happening for 2d arrays, as well, meaning I can't even declare a set of 2d matrices, as a workaround.
Then I tried
row_vector[K] x[N,N];
but that gives back real, not int. And when I do something like
int row_vector[K] x[N,N];
that's just not proper syntax.
I also tried passing logical values, hoping they'd be re-cast as ints, but no. I passed arrays, I passed them cast with as.matrix, I checked their dimension both before and after being put into the data list.
This is with R version 3.4.1 on OSX 10.11.6, using the most recent version of stan, that was just compiled from source, today.
What am I missing? OR, how might I cast a single real to an integer, so that the integer-requiring function doesn't break?
(And, WHERE is the documentation? The best I can find is long-dead comment threads.)

Strange pair of type declarations

Okay, so it may not be that strange, but I'm really new to Ada. In my job, I am translating legacy Ada to C, and have come across something that I haven't seen yet. I searched around, but couldn't really find it; here it is.
type Discrete_Names is ( ENUM_POS_4, --label names in an enum
ENUM_POS_5, --that evaluate to 4, 5, and 6
ENUM_POS_6); --respectively
type Discrete_Array_Type is Array (Discrete_Names) of Discrete.Does_Not_Matter
Side noteā€”the Discrete.Does_Not_Matter just references another type in a different library.
It would be great if someone could just help me get my bearings and just figure out what is going on here.
Well, it is quite simple. In Ada arrays can be indexed by any discrete type, that is, integers, characters or enumeration types (your case). The line
type Discrete_Array_Type is Array (Discrete_Names) of Does_Not_Matter
declares Discrete_Array_Type as the type of an array that contains values of type Does_Not_Matter and it is indexed by values of type Discrete_Names.
If your doubt stems from the fact that ENUM_POS_4 has Pos equal to 4 -- so that it seems that the first index of the array is 4 and not 0 -- my suggestion is... forget about it. The compiler will take care of that. In Ada arrays can start from any index. For example, if you say
type Array_Foo is array(Positive range <>) of Characters;
Bar : Array_Foo(10..15);
Bar will be just 6 entries long (not 16) and when you access Bar(12) the compiler -- behind the scenes -- will remove the initial offset "10" to "12" so that you will access the third memory location reserved to Bar. (Actually, I think that for the sake of efficiency it will add 12 to the address of Bar diminished by 10 times the integer sizes, but this is a detail...)
My personal experience is that in cases like this you should not consider the enumerative type like a "integer in disguise" (although it will be internally represented by an integer), but like a type of its own that can be used to index an array. Let the compiler worry about the internal low-level details.

Fortran Pointer arithmetic

That's my first question post ever ... don't be cruel, please.
My problem is the following. I'd like to assign a fortran pointer as an expression. I think that's not possible by simple fortran techniques. But since new fortran versions seem to provide ways to handle things used in C and C++ (like c_ptr and c_f_pointer ... ), maybe someone knows a way to solve my problem. (I have not really in idea about C, but I read that pointer arithmetic is possible in C)
To make things more clear, here is the code which came to my mind immediately but isn't working:
program pointer
real(8),target :: a
real(8),pointer :: b
b=>a*2.0d0 ! b=>a is of course working
do i=1,10
a=dble(i)*2.0d0
write(*,*)b
end do
end program
I know that there are ways around this issue, but in the actual program, all of which came to my mind, would lead to much longer computation time and/or quite wiered code.
Thanks, a lot, in advance!
Best, Peter
From Michael Metcalf,
Pointers are variables with the POINTER attribute; they are not a distinct data type (and so no 'pointer arithmetic' is possible).
They are conceptually a descriptor listing the attributes of the objects (targets) that the pointer may point to, and the address, if any, of a target. They have no associated storage until it is allocated or otherwise associated (by pointer assignment, see below):
So your idea of b=>a*2 doesn't work because b is being assigned to a and not given the value of a.
Expression, in general (there two and a half very significant exceptions), are not valid pointer targets. Evaluation of an expression (in general) yields a value, not an object.
(The exceptions relate to the case where the overall expression results in a reference to a function with a data pointer result - in that case the expression can be used on the right hand side of a pointer assignment statement, or as the actual argument in a procedure reference that correspond to a pointer dummy argument or [perhaps - and F2008 only] in any context where a variable might be required, such as the left hand side of an ordinary assignment statement. But your expressions do not result in such a function reference and I don't think the use cases are relevant to what you wnt to do. )
I think you want the value of b to change as the "underlying" value of a changes, as per the form of the initial expression. Beyond the valid pointer target issue, this requires behaviour contrary to one of the basic principles of the language (most languages really) - evaluation of an expression uses the value of its primaries at the time the expression is evaluation - subsequent changes in those primaries do not result in a change in the historically evaluated value.
Instead, consider writing a function that calculates b based on a.
program pointer
IMPLICIT NONE
real(8) :: a
do i=1,10
a=dble(i)*2.0d0
write(*,*) b(a)
end do
contains
function b(x)
real(kind(a)), intent(in) :: x
real(kind(a)) :: b
b = 2.0d0 * x
end function b
end program
Update: I'm getting closer to what I wanted to have (for those who are interested):
module test
real,target :: a
real, pointer :: c
abstract interface
function func()
real :: func
end function func
end interface
procedure (func), pointer :: f => null ()
contains
function f1()
real,target :: f1
c=>a
f1 = 2.0*c
return
end function f1
end module
program test_func_ptrs
use test
implicit none
integer::i
f=>f1
do i=1,10
a=real(i)*2.0
write(*,*)f()
end do
end program test_func_ptrs
I would be completely satisfied if I could find a way to avoid the dummy arguments (at least in when I'm calling f).
Additional information: The point is that I want to define different functions f1 and deside before starting the loop, what f is going to be inside of the loop (depending on whatever input).
Pointer arithmetic, in the sense of calculating address offsets from a pointer, is not allowed in Fortran. Pointer arithmetic can easily cause memory errors and the authors of Fortran considered it unnecessary. (One could do it via the back door of interoperability with C.)
Pointers in Fortran are useful for passing procedures as arguments, setting up data structures such as linked lists (e.g., How can I implement a linked list in fortran 2003-2008), etc.

Passing multi-dimensional array in fortran subroutines

I am trying to understand a Fortran code written by someone else. The code is doing what it is supposed to do so I am assuming that it works fine. A subroutine called "fft" is being called from another subroutine called "convol". Inside "convol", an array is declared like this:
real, dimension fri(n+1,n,nh,2,0:1)
call fft(fri)
Inside "fft", the declaration is like this:
subroutine wrft3b(fri)
real, dimension fri(2,n+1,n,nh,0:1)
I don't understand why the array lengths are not consistent and still the code is working. Any clues what might be happening here?
The important thing is that the length is the same. If the interface is not explicit, this will not throw an error for the contiguous explicit-shape array. Only the elements of the array will have different indexes (determined by the column-major order), that in the calling program.

Resources