Re: [AMBER-Developers] PMEMD missing type?

From: Robert Duke <>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 16:40:48 -0500

I agree with you in principle; the problem here is that about every third
release of the intel compiler is broken or the interfaces are changed, or
mkl is screwed up, etc. etc. I see no hope of staying ahead of them with
workarounds, so as long as we are using that compiler, I think we are going
to be stuck recommending versions that work. We went through this bigtime
with them on itanium; they apparently now have hit a point in their own
complexity or have lost a vision of a solid product, or something. What I
would recommend against is funky workarounds, just to get some bloody
version to work; formally more correct f90-f95, well I can see that, as long
as you don't then break other compilers.
Regards - Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ross Walker" <>
To: "'AMBER Developers Mailing List'" <>
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 3:48 PM
Subject: RE: [AMBER-Developers] PMEMD missing type?

>> As a workaround, I would revert to a bloody release of ifort that
>> works...
>> There is no requirement for our code to function with broken compilers,
>> in
>> my opinion, at least...
> Agreed. Except teaching that to some users who may have trouble
> understanding exactly what a compiler is let alone which version it is is
> about as much fun as pulling teeth so if we can find a simple (and benign)
> workaround this is easier than trying to explain how to obtain older
> versions of the compilers and/or file a bug report with Intel etc.
> All the best
> Ross
> /\
> \/
> |\oss Walker
> | Assistant Research Professor |
> | San Diego Supercomputer Center |
> | Tel: +1 858 822 0854 | EMail:- |
> | | |
> Note: Electronic Mail is not secure, has no guarantee of delivery, may not
> be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues.
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list

AMBER-Developers mailing list
Received on Tue Mar 09 2010 - 14:00:03 PST
Custom Search