error#8093 ，error#6511，编写代码遇到这两个错误请问怎么解决

菜鸟萌新

* p+ D2 }# X) N) K. U; g5 B; G

5 Q& Z" {' f& E描述错误＃8093：DO主体内的do变量不应出现在变量定义上下文中。 [I]
$ W; l3 P+ n$ t) z" L+ J描述错误＃6511：此DO变量已在同一嵌套结构中用作外部DO变量。 [I]

4 u1 L8 [* L+ K  o+ Z  B. B
以上描述是用谷歌翻译，如有错误请指正。
" z1 K1 N$ e7 W! _: H! o截图中代码是用来冒泡排序。
) _% E1 ^* W* }0 t. `$ `! L% ~; R3 \
个人理解是双循环中的变量I用了两次，出现在下一个do循环中，但就fortran语法来说这是允许的，不知道如何解决。也有可能是我对错误的描述理解出现偏差

* w+ k. ~6 e8 }( t2 a, M6 Y. z! ~
$ l' g1 e& z( t+ H% J

菜鸟萌新

" o" R0 V% ~9 i8 K5 |, W
https://software.intel.com/en-us ... c-os-x/topic/559950

The interesting (to me, anyway) part of this question is that the do-variable in an io-implied-do does NOT have "statement scope" the way a DATA implied-do or array constructor implied-do variable do.  With statement scope, the implied-do variable is a new, different variable that inherits only the type of any outer-scope variable (but that type must be integer.)The "i" in the I/O implied DO is the same variable as the line 1 DO control variable and ifort is absolutely correct in complaining about this., pgf90 could support this as an extension, but would need to have the ability to diagnose it (perhaps through a standards checking switch), or else risk being a nonconforming implementation.

The other interesting part is that we do, sort-of, allow changing DO variables, as an extension, but you have to do it by passing the variable to a procedure which then changes it. ifort recognizes the possibility and generates an explicit test rather than a loop count if it sees this.
0 P# \5 H8 t9 e! b/ O
1 y% K! v' [' ^3 `" }7 n" L$ h这个问题的有趣（对我来说，无论如何）部分是io声明的do中的do的变量没有DATA声明的方式或者数组构造函数声明-do变量的方式。 对于语句范围，声明do变量是一个新的，不同的变量，它只继承任何外部作用域变量的类型（但该类型必须是整数。）I / O暗示DO中的“i”是相同的变量 作为第1行DO控制变量和ifort在抱怨这一点时绝对正确。，pgf90可以支持这作为扩展，但是需要能够诊断它（可能通过标准检查开关），否则冒险成为 不合格的实施。
1 E  Q  Z; h$ v; Y0 ~( A
另一个有趣的部分是我们这样做，排序，允许更改DO变量，作为扩展，但你必须通过将变量传递给一个程序然后更改它来完成它。 如果它看到这个，ifort会识别出这种可能性并生成一个显式测试而不是一个循环计数。

菜鸟萌新

https://software.intel.com/en-us ... c-os-x/topic/559950
  L' l# {! K0 x1 L. N6 F
# C9 I" F# b- R+ ~The interesting (to me, anyway) part of this question is that the do-variable in an io-implied-do does NOT have "statement scope" the way a DATA implied-do or array constructor implied-do variable do.  With statement scope, the implied-do variable is a new, different variable that inherits only the type of any outer-scope variable (but that type must be integer.)The "i" in the I/O implied DO is the same variable as the line 1 DO control variable and ifort is absolutely correct in complaining about this., pgf90 could support this as an extension, but would need to have the ability to diagnose it (perhaps through a standards checking switch), or else risk being a nonconforming implementation.

The other interesting part is that we do, sort-of, allow changing DO variables, as an extension, but you have to do it by passing the variable to a procedure which then changes it. ifort recognizes the possibility and generates an explicit test rather than a loop count if it sees this.
3 M! O" n( a- U0 L0 V
2 u4 N% r( T  d/ B
这个问题的有趣（对我来说，无论如何）部分是io-implied-do中的do-variable没有DATA隐含的方式或者数组构造函数暗示-do变量的方式。 对于语句范围，implied-do变量是一个新的，不同的变量，它只继承任何外部作用域变量的类型（但该类型必须是整数。）I / O暗示DO中的“i”是相同的变量 作为第1行DO控制变量和ifort在抱怨这一点时绝对正确。，pgf90可以支持这作为扩展，但是需要能够诊断它（可能通过标准检查开关），否则冒险成为 不合格的实施。
5 U4 d8 a8 @7 T; z% E/ P3 {+ n
' v' ]; h0 p. a1 |5 d& c0 O另一个有趣的部分是我们这样做，排序，允许更改DO变量，作为扩展，但你必须通过将变量传递给一个程序然后更改它来完成它。 如果它看到这个，ifort会识别出这种可能性并生成一个显式测试而不是一个循环计数。

菜鸟萌新

已找到问题， 是另外一个模块do循环没有加终结语结束循环，i 的值被篡改，因为我的循环语句用的是i 作为变量，对所有的循环语句都造成了干扰