On 5/30/23 23:08, Thomas Koenig via Fortran wrote:
> On 30.05.23 15:32, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> thank you for all your input. I have read the funding requirements and
>> checked
>> out the application form. We have to agree on a project goal and
>> describe why
>> it is critical to fund this project.
>>
>> Let me try a first shot on this:
>>
>> - Title:
>>
>> GFortran-Improvement
>>
>> - Abstract:
>>
>> Enable the free gfortran compiler to support contemporary language
>> paradigms.
>>
>> - Dependencies (on the project as well as projects that depend on the
>> technology)
>>
>> Does any one have a convincing project that uses contemporary Fortran?
>
> CP2K is an example, it's open source and written in Fortran.
>
> https://www.cp2k.org/
>
>
>> Project goal (max 900 words!):
>>
>> * Complete language intrinsic parallel programming paradigm coarrays.
>> This
>> includes completing native coarray support (thread based). As well as
>> refactoring of the library based coarray approach to support
>> coarrays in
>> modules. I.e. research on how to support the use of coarrays in
>> modules that
>> are not aware of coarrays (not compiled with its support enabled).
>
Is distributed memory support for co-arrays of interest as well? There
is a lot of code that uses MPI (for which there is some push for using
more modern Fortran features), and there are also other libraries such
as GASPI.
> The current work is process-based, and there is no problem that we see
> about library code.
>
> What about this?
>
> * Fortran has a safe and intuitive method for parallel execution,
> coarrays. There is currently no efficient implementation for
> multi-core CPUs on a freely available compiler. The goal is to bring
> the existing, process-based shared memory implementation on a branch
> into gfortran mainline as an experimental, but useful feature.
>
> I also would not promise complete coarray support by project's end.
> This would include teams, which are scary :-)
>
> Having a useful
>
> (There is Intel, which is dog-slow, and there is NAG, which costs
> money).
Is this also expected in Flang? See:
https://crd.lbl.gov/divisions/amcr/computer-science-amcr/class/research/caffeine/
https://crd.lbl.gov/divisions/amcr/computer-science-amcr/class/research/caffeine/
Probably good to make a case for two open source compilers.
>
>> * Complete standard compliance from Fortran 2003 onwards. Esp. fixing
>> finalization of partially derived types (PDTs) and issues in the
>> associate
>> command.
>
> Again, we should not promise what we cannot deliver.
>
>> * Ensure maintainability of gfortran by cleaning up/refactoring APIs
>> including
>> the scalarizer. Improve the single responsibility pattern's (SRP)
>> use by,
>> e.g., ensuring the parser does no longer parts of the resolve
>> stage. The goal
>> is not only to separate responsibilities but also to get clearer error
>> messages and with that improve user-friendliness.
>>
>> Why is it critical to fund this project (300 words max)?
>
>> Improving the freely available gfortran compiler to support state of
>> the art
>> parallelism and language paradigms as well as removing bugs and ensuring
>> standard compliance will allow existing codes to be compiled more
>> reliably.
>> Furthermore is the lack of support for the newer language paradigms
>> preventing
>> the use of Fortran in current projects. Developing in contemporary
>> Fortran needs
>> commercial compilers (that support these paradigms already), which
>> leads to
>> dependencies on those.
>
> Fortran remains one of the premier language for science, especially for
> high-performance computing and fields like quantum chemistry or
> computational fluid dynamics.
>
> gfortran is the default Fortran compiler on Linux systems, and lack of
> features and bugs in in gfortran hinder adoption of more modern, safer
> and more efficient language features. The project has been almost
> entirely volunteer-driven so far, but is currently suffering from
> a lack of active developers. Funding will motivate experienced
> gfortran developers who have reduced their contributions to return
> to the project and advance it substantially.
>
>
Any possibilities for new contributors to participate?
>> This is what I propose for a start. I welcome everyone to participate
>> and make
>> the goal or the reasoning more elaborate. We may propose the funding
>> request in
>> English or in German. When no one participates, I am tempted to
>> propose it in
>> German, as that being my first language, I feel more confident in it.
>
> Make it English, all people here on the list should be able to follow.
>
>> The company Badger Systems GmbH, Cologne, DE, I am working for will
>> support in
>> project and bureaucratic management and is willing to act as the
>> proposer of
>> this funding request. We of course will be profiting from this.
>>
>> Any input is welcome. Feel free to ask, comment, agree, disagree (only
>> when you
>> propose something better) or just acknowledge.
>
> One thing I did not find at a cursory glance is how the project funding
> would be distributed, and under which conditions.
>
> Did you find anything on the website?
>
> Best regards
>
> Thomas
>
