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

2 \& a: z: x# K9 ^! P1 J
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]
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]

& y4 l9 l  h8 ^! ]& P# p
1 h, [# v: q) ^: b( s3 p% \以上描述是用谷歌翻译，如有错误请指正。
2 M2 z, e; A9 I% X1 \  w截图中代码是用来冒泡排序。
6 T1 u- f5 m- F' o
( v0 P- ]% @; f! a$ O5 {- p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

菜鸟萌新

1 I6 Y; k* r) L  V+ y: ?) F/ d( B+ j
https://software.intel.com/en-us ... c-os-x/topic/559950
- q) B' W- ~/ K2 B5 u2 r
2 s& Y; i1 ?) b! j) iThe 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.
1 `, i+ A: X# O# k5 `
9 R7 x, M) j+ ~1 A; {+ `7 aThe 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.

1 n- z) k( `% }) n0 _) s2 R' W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。

2 {8 q/ k" e. |0 [' j' p1 I3 Z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。
: a# C0 J2 i; u( Y" P

菜鸟萌新

https://software.intel.com/en-us ... c-os-x/topic/559950
2 v3 U" B7 D' b9 d& N
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.
8 U  p- Y5 d, l- Q4 N' N6 R+ Z
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.
( [; |7 P- [9 I" m0 x) \" j  ?

# k  R9 w9 Z  T" K7 G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。

0 [2 l  V$ }  k2 p7 a. v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

" y9 z* {6 `% y+ {7 |' `+ q
6 A% a. r3 Y  h: t9 n! {0 `; m  y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
2 P5 X; ?1 i, a) y7 x. K