----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID:
<43bf353c-5098-4c8b-afee-455fcd1db2den@googlegroups.com> 3c6cdc77
@REPLY: 1@dont-email.me> e40fd4aa
@REPLYADDR Farzad Tatar
<tatarfarzad1992@gmail.com>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 Farzad Tatar
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-References:
<aa2d38fc-1df2-4703-b1b3-67adf45e2793n@googlegroups.com> <8a0d90c2-1912-41f9-8cf1-76c8f12698adn@googlegroups.com>
<c8ac7613-a6bc-4804-a668-40dbc9de519en@googlegroups.com> zW7d.89812@fx43.iad> 1@dont-email.me>
@RFC-Message-ID:
<43bf353c-5098-4c8b-afee-455fcd1db2den@googlegroups.com>
@TZUTC: -0700
@PID: G2/1.0
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
> > You should almost never use a floating point exponent with an integer
> > value in fortran. You should use an integer exponent here. The
> > floating point exponent expression is much more expensive (it
> > requires a LOG() and and EXP() evaluation internally), and it is
> > potentially less accurate.
Thank you for your advice. Yes, I did a short search and now I
see that even though it solves the problem, it is better to not use
decimal for that. In fact, I am using Fortran to improve the numerical
efficiency of an extensive problem. Therefore, following such useful hints is
mandatory for me.
Cheers,
Farzad
--- G2/1.0
* Origin: usenet.network (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/715
848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 1081 5058/104 5075/128
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441