Re: [AMBER-Developers] PMEMD missing type?

From: Robert Duke <>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 15:25:20 -0500

The compiler is broken; there is nothing "nonstandard" here, near as I can
tell, and the code in pme_setup.fpp is little changed (I #ifdef'd addition
for CUDA) from pmemd 10.
Regards - Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Roberts" <>
To: "AMBER Developers Mailing List" <>
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 3:19 PM
Subject: Re: [AMBER-Developers] PMEMD missing type?

On 9/3/2010, at 1:47 p.m., Ross Walker wrote:

> 10.1.018 also works.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [mailto:amber-developers-
>>] On Behalf Of case
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 10:03 AM
>> To: AMBER Developers Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [AMBER-Developers] PMEMD missing type?
>> On Tue, Mar 09, 2010, case wrote:
>> pme_setup.f90
>>>>> ifort -fast -c pme_setup.f90
>>>>> pme_setup.f90(417): error #6404: This name does not have a type,
>> and
>>>>> must
>>>>> have an explicit type. [NATOM]
>>>>> do n = 1, natom
>>>>> ------------^
>>> What Intel compiler are you using?
>> One quick addtional point, then I have meetings all day:
>> For me, it appears that ifort 10.1.025 works, but 11.1.069 fails.
>> ...dac

Sorry for the delay. I tried a fresh tree, and ran into problems connected
with the gcc-4.5 compilers. It seems that every so often the version coming
down from MacPorts gets borked.

However, it seems that others have beaten me to it. Is the general feeling
that the Intel compilers are just stricter than they were (and the code is
doing something non-standard), or rather that the compilers are themselves

For the time being, I've commented pmemd out in the Makefile. As an aside,
pmemd compiled OK under Intel Mac 11.1.076 when it was configured
separately. I'm not sure what difference, if any, that makes. Is it possible
now to test pmemd using the old build style?

AMBER-Developers mailing list

AMBER-Developers mailing list
Received on Tue Mar 09 2010 - 12:30:04 PST
Custom Search