Fortran How can I fix incorrect output from my Fortran subroutine for a test matrix?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a Fortran programming issue related to matrix initialization and output. The original code defines a matrix in both the main program and a subroutine, leading to confusion as the subroutine's matrix is initialized correctly while the main program's matrix remains uninitialized, resulting in garbage values during output. The solution involves passing the existing matrix from the main program to the subroutine, allowing the subroutine to modify the same matrix instead of creating a new one. A revised code example demonstrates this approach, successfully resolving the output issue. The user expresses gratitude for the guidance, indicating that the solution worked effectively.
autobot.d
Messages
67
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

So I have a program that calls a module that contains a subroutine so I can make a matrix.
When I write the matrix in the subroutine (commented out part in module) I get the right output, but when the main program tries to output it is some insanely small or large numbers.
I am new to Fortran (not coding) so any help/criticism would be greatly appreciated! Definitely a bit of a learning curve but I am excited to learn fortran.

Code:
program test

use test_mod

implicit none

integer :: k 
real, allocatable, Dimension(:,:) :: test_mat

write(*,*) 'Dimension for square test matrix: '
read (*,*) k

allocate(test_mat(k,k))
call test_matrix(k)

!This gives bad output, but right dimensions
write(*,*) test_mat
deallocate(test_mat)

end program test

Code:
module test_mod

implicit none

contains

    subroutine test_matrix(k)
    
integer :: k
real, dimension(:,:), allocatable :: test_mat
INTEGER :: i,j,m,nallocate(test_mat(k,k))

do i = 1,k
do j = 1,k

test_mat(i,j) = 1.d0*((i+j-1))
end do
end do

!This loop gives correct output
!do m = 1,k
!write(*,*)(test_mat(m,n), n=1,k)
!end do

deallocate(test_mat)

end subroutine test_matrix
end module test_mod
 
Technology news on Phys.org
I'm not a Fortran expert, but I think the problem is that you have two arrays named test_mat - one in the main program, and the other in your subroutine. The only one that gets initialized is the one in the subroutine, so when you print out its values, you get what you expect.

The array in the main program is never initialized, so when you print its values, you get garbage.
 
autobot.d said:
When I write the matrix in the subroutine (commented out part in module) I get the right output, but when the main program tries to output it is some insanely small or large numbers.
As Mark says, you've actually defined a new matrix in the subroutine. What you need to do is to pass the existing matrix to the subroutine. Try the following code (based on your code) for example and see if you can work out what it's doing

BTW. I put some redundant code in there to assign to "j" in the subroutine. This is just to help you understand how the variables defined in the subroutine are different to those in the main program, even if they have the same name (whereas the "passed" variables are effectively the same, even if they are given different names).

Code:
program alloctest
implicit none
  integer :: i,j 
  real, allocatable, Dimension(:,:) :: test_mat

  print "(a$)",'Dimension for square test matrix: '
  read (*,*) j
  allocate(test_mat(j,j))
  call test_matrix(test_mat,j)

  do i = 1,j
    print *,test_mat(i,:)
  end do

  deallocate(test_mat)

contains

subroutine test_matrix(tm,size)
implicit none
integer :: size
real, dimension(:,:) :: tm

  integer :: i,j
  do i = 1,size
    do j = 1,size
      test_mat(i,j) = 1.d0*((i+j-1))
    end do
  end do
  j = 0          ! Should have no effect in main program.

end subroutine test_matrix
end program alloctest
 
Last edited:
Thank you so much. That was very helpful and it worked!
 
Thread 'Is this public key encryption?'
I've tried to intuit public key encryption but never quite managed. But this seems to wrap it up in a bow. This seems to be a very elegant way of transmitting a message publicly that only the sender and receiver can decipher. Is this how PKE works? No, it cant be. In the above case, the requester knows the target's "secret" key - because they have his ID, and therefore knows his birthdate.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
59
Views
11K
Replies
5
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top