Hi Mike,
No, revision 6286 did not modify jt65.f90. A change was made in
decoder.f90 to correct the arguments to jt65a() the second time it is
called.
-- Joe
On 12/17/2015 9:28 AM, Michael Black wrote:
> Yes...6286 patched jt65.f90 -- am I wrong that that file is NOT used for
> WSJT-X but just for a standlone test program? If so, how would it fix
> WSJT-X?
>
> I'm running the debug version now but still not getting line #'s on the
> error messages. I used the other FORTRAN runtime error report to find the
> call mismatch.
>
> 73
> Mike W9MDB
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Joe Taylor<j...@princeton.edu> wrote:
>
>> What was "just for testing"? What error seems random???
>>
>> The error you reported yesterday was fixed with r6286.
>>
>> -- Joe
>>
>> On 12/17/2015 8:29 AM, Michael Black wrote:
>>> You know I thought it looked like that was just for testing....so it
>> really
>>> shouldn't have any bearing on the error we've been seeing, right?
>>> The error seems random.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> wsjt-devel mailing list
>> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
