dear friends,
here is the full code that is creating the problem!!! while running
with ifort, the configuration is created as wished, but not in
gfortran....

!===========================================
! This is the main driver routine
! of the reverse monte carlo program
program rmonte
!===========================================

In article <59dcb027-ad4d-4f90-b46c-91696758b4bc@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
rudra gmail.com> writes:

Read the f*cking manual!!!!!!

I've already pointed you at the docs twice, and I gave you
test code.

RAN() does not do want you think.

On Fri, 16 May 2008 04:52:17 +0000 (UTC), Steven G. Kargl wrote:

In article <1gqipl8a0qxil$.115otr8lebpjr$.dlg@40tude.net>,
Ron Ford nowhere.net> writes:

"Steven G. Kargl" troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:g0j4va$8ad$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...

On May 16, 7:31 am, "Ron Ford" wrote:

The entry Steve quoted *is* in your doc (whether HTML of PDF). The RAN
entry, which you quoted, says "see RAND for complete documentation". Now,
the RAND entry is just next to that one, and even if it weren't both HTML
and PDF docs have plenty of hyperlinks to get you from one place to
another: in the case here, clicking on *RAND* in "see RAND for complete
documentation" would have scrolled down to the RAND entry.

When I look at "colour" in my New Oxford American Dictionary, it says
"Bristish spelling of COLOR". And I go to COLOR (and they also have
hyperlinks) if I want more.

On May 16, 12:43 am, rudra gmail.com> wrote:

e p chandler juno.com> wrote:

That one I disagree with. Nothing wrong with such numbers as arguments
to selected_real_kind. That's the number of decimal digits you want and
is pretty much the normal use of selected_real kind. I normally put the
selected_real_kind invocation in the definition of a named constant in a
module instead of using the whole long-winded thing in each type
definition, but otherwise literal constants are exactly what I tend to
use with it.

I suspect that the particular numbers used (4 and 8) are confusing you
into thinking that they are kind values instead of arguments to
selected_real_kind. Of course, I'd posit that, considering the number of
other errors here, and that 4 is a pretty small number of decimal digits
to ask for, the OP quite likely has this same confusion and actually
meant to use the 4 and 8 as kind values, which is indeed non-portable
and non-advisable.

Most of your other comments I agree with.

On May 16, 11:07 am, nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote: