Object-Oriented Programming in Fortran 2003
Part 2: Data Polymorphism
Note: This article was revised in March 2015 and again in January 2016 to bring it up-to-date with the production software release and to correct errors in the examples.
This is the second part to a series of articles that explore Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) in Fortran 2003 (F2003). The first installment introduced the OOP paradigm and three important features to OOP: inheritance, polymorphism, and information hiding. F2003 supports inheritance through type extension, polymorphism through its CLASS keyword, and information hiding through its PUBLIC/PRIVATE keywords/binding-attributes.
There are two basic types of polymorphism: procedure polymorphism and data polymorphism. Part one of the series covered procedure polymorphism, which deals with procedures that can operate on a variety of data types and values. Data polymorphism, a topic for this article, deals with program variables that can store and operate on a variety of data types and values.
In addition to data polymorphism, we will also examine F2003's typed allocation, sourced allocation, unlimited polymorphic objects, generic type-bound procedures, abstract types, and deferred bindings.
Data Polymorphism in F2003
The CLASS keyword allows F2003 programmers to create polymorphic variables. A polymorphic variable is a variable whose data type is dynamic at runtime. It must be a pointer variable, allocatable variable, or a dummy argument. Below are some examples of polymorphic variables:
subroutine init(sh) class(shape) :: sh ! polymorphic dummy argument class(shape), pointer :: p ! polymorphic pointer variable class(shape), allocatable:: als ! polymorphic allocatable variable end subroutine
In the example above, the sh, p, and als polymorphic variables can each hold values of type shape or any type extension of shape. The sh dummy argument receives its type and value from the actual argument to sh of subroutine init(). Just as how polymorphic dummy arguments form the basis to procedure polymorphism, polymorphic pointer and allocatable variables form the basis to data polymorphism.
The polymorphic pointer variable p above can point to an object of type shape or any of its extensions. For example,
subroutine init(sh) class(shape),target :: sh class(shape), pointer :: p select type (sh) type is (shape) p => sh : ! shape specific code here type is (rectangle) p => sh : ! rectangle specific code here type is (square) p => sh : ! square specific code here class default p => null() end select : end subroutine
We used the select type construct above to illustrate the fact that the polymorphic pointer, p, can take on several types. In this case, p can point to a shape, rectangle, or square object. The dynamic type of pointer p is not known until the pointer assignment (i.e., p => sh) is executed.
An allocatable polymorphic variable receives its type and optionally its value at the point of its allocation. For example,
class(shape), allocatable :: als allocate(als)
In the example above, we allocate polymorphic variable als. By default, the dynamic type of a polymorphic allocatable variable is the same as its declared type after executing an allocate statement. In the example above, variable als receives dynamic type shape after we execute the allocate statement.
Obviously there is not much use for polymorphic allocatable variables if we can only specify the declared type in an allocate statement. Therefore, F2003 provides typed allocation to allow the programmer to specify a type other than the declared type in an allocate statement. Below is an example:
class(shape), allocatable :: als allocate(rectangle::als)
In the allocate statement above, we specify a type followed by a :: and the variable name. In this case, we specify rectangle as the dynamic type of variable als. Note that the declared type of als is still shape. Also the type specification must be the same or a type extension of the declared type of the allocatable variable. Below is another example that illustrates how we may allocate a polymorphic variable with the same type of another object:
subroutine init(sh) class(shape) :: sh class(shape), allocatable :: als select type (sh) type is (shape) allocate(shape::als) type is (rectangle) allocate(rectangle::als) type is (square) allocate(square::als) end select : end subroutine
Now, let's illustrate how we may expand our example above to create a "copy" of an object.
subroutine init(sh) class(shape) :: sh class(shape), allocatable :: als select type (sh) type is (shape) allocate(shape::als) select type(a) type is (shape) als = sh ! copy sh end select type is (rectangle) allocate(rectangle::als) select type (als) type is (rectangle) als = sh ! copy sh end select type is (square) allocate(square::als) select type (als) type is (square) als = sh ! copy sh end select end select : end subroutine
Recall that the programmer can only access the components of the declared type by default. Therefore, in the example above, we can only access the shape components for object als by default. In order to access the components of the dynamic type of object als, a nested select type is used for object als.
The previous example presents an interesting application of data polymorphism; making a copy or a clone of an object. Unfortunately, the previous example does not scale well if shape has several type extensions. Also whenever we add a type extension to shape, we need to update our init() subroutine to include the new type extension. To address this problem, F2003 provides sourced allocation, as illustrated below:
subroutine init(sh) class(shape) :: sh class(shape), allocatable :: als allocate(als, source=sh) ! als becomes a clone of sh : end subroutine
The optional source= argument to allocate specifies sourced allocation. In our example above, the allocate statement will allocate als with the same dynamic type as sh and with the same value(s) of sh. Note that the declared type of the source= must be the same or a type extension of the allocate argument (e.g., als).
Unlimited Polymorphic Objects
Our discussion on data polymorphism so far has been limited to derived types and their type extensions. While this satisfies most applications, sometimes we may want to write a procedure or a data structure that can operate on any type including any intrinsic or derived type. F2003 provides unlimited polymorphic objects for just that purpose. Below are some examples of unlimited polymorphic objects:
subroutine init(sh) class(*) :: sh ! unlimited polymorphic dummy argument class(*), pointer :: p ! unlimited polymorphic pointer variable class(*), allocatable:: als ! unlimited polymorphic allocatable variable end subroutine
The class(*) keyword is used to specify an unlimited polymorphic object declaration. The operations for unlimited polymorphic objects are similar to those mentioned for "limited" polymorphic objects in the previous section. However, unlike "limited" polymorphic objects, their "unlimited" counterparts can take any F2003 type. Below is an example of unlimited polymorphic objects used with procedure polymorphism:
subroutine init(sh) class(*) :: sh select type(sh) class is (shape) : ! shape specific code type is (integer) : ! integer specific code type is (real) : ! real specific code type is (complex) : ! complex specific code end select end subroutine
Similarly, any pointer or target can be assigned to an unlimited polymorphic pointer, regardless of type. For example,
subroutine init(sh) class(*),target :: sh class(*), pointer :: p p => sh select type(p) class is (shape) : ! shape specific code type is (integer) : ! integer specific code type is (real) : ! real specific code type is (complex) : ! complex specific code end select end subroutine
The example above shows sh assigned to pointer p and then a select type construct is used to query the dynamic type of pointer p.
Unlimited polymorphic objects can also be used with typed allocation. In fact, a type (or source= argument) must be specified with the allocate statement since there is no default type for class(*). However, unlike their "limited" counterparts, any F2003 type, intrinsic or derived, can be specified. For example,
subroutine init(sh) class(*) :: sh class(*), allocatable :: als select type(sh) type is (shape) allocate(shape::als) type is (integer) allocate(integer::als) type is (real) allocate(real::als) type is (complex) allocate(complex::als) end select : end subroutine
Sourced allocation can also operate on unlimited polymorphic objects:
subroutine init(sh) class(*) :: sh class(*), allocatable :: als allocate(als, source=sh) ! als becomes a clone of sh : end subroutine
Note if the source= argument is an unlimited polymorphic object (i.e., declared class(*)), the allocate argument (e.g., als) must also be an unlimited polymorphic object. When the allocate argument is declared class(*), the declared type in the source= argument can be any type including class(*), any derived type, or any intrinsic type. For example,
class(*), allocatable :: als integer i i = 1234 source(als, source=i)
The above code demonstrates sourced allocation with an unlimited polymorphic allocatable argument and an intrinsic typed source= argument.
Case Study: Data Polymorphic Linked List
As mentioned in the previous section, one of the advantages to unlimited polymorphic objects is that we can create data structures that can operate on all data types (intrinsic and derived) in F2003. To demonstrate, we will create data structures that can be used to create a heterogeneous list of objects. Traditionally, data stored in a linked list all have the same data type. However, with unlimited polymorphic objects, we can easily create a list that contains a variety of data types and values.
We start out by creating a derived type that will represent each link in our linked list. For example,
type link class(*), pointer :: value => null() type(link), pointer :: next => null() end type link
The basic link derived type above contains an unlimited polymorphic pointer that points to the value of the link followed by a pointer to the next link in the list. Recall that information hiding allows others to use an object without understanding its implementation details. Therefore, we will place this derived type into its own module, add a constructor, and add some type-bound procedures to access the value(s). For example,
module link_mod private ! information hiding public :: link type link private ! information hiding class(*), pointer :: value => null() type(link), pointer :: next => null() contains procedure :: getValue ! get value in this link procedure :: nextLink ! get the link after this link procedure :: setNextLink ! set the link after this link end type link interface link procedure constructor end interface contains function nextLink(this) class(link) :: this class(link), pointer :: nextLink nextLink => this%next end function nextLink subroutine setNextLink(this,next) class(link) :: this class(link), pointer :: next this%next => next end subroutine setNextLink function getValue(this) class(link) :: this class(*), pointer :: getValue getValue => this%value end function getValue function constructor(value, next) class(link),pointer :: constructor class(*) :: value class(link), pointer :: next allocate(constructor) constructor%next => next allocate(constructor%value, source=value) end function constructor end module link_mod
Because we added the private keywords above, the user of the object must use the getValue() function to access the values of each link in our list, the nextLink() procedure to access the next link in the list, and setNextLink() to add a link after a link. Note that the getValue() function returns a pointer to a class(*), meaning it can return an object of any type.
We employ type overloading for the constructor function. Recall from part one that type overloading allows us to create a generic interface with the same name as a derived type. This allows us to create a constructor function and hide it behind the name of the type. Using our example above, we can construct a link in the following manner:
class(link),pointer :: linkList integer v linkList => link(v, linkList%next)
Although one could easily create a linked list with just the link object above, the real power of OOP lies in its ability to create flexible and reusable components. Unfortunately, the user is still required to understand how the list is constructed with the link object (e.g., the link constructor assigns its result to the linkList pointer above). Therefore, we can create another object called list that acts as the "Application Program Interface" or API to the link object. Below is an example of a list object that acts as an API to our linked list data structure:.
type list class(link),pointer :: firstLink => null() ! first link in list class(link),pointer :: lastLink => null() ! last link in list contains procedure :: addInteger ! add integer to list procedure :: addChar ! add character to list procedure :: addReal ! add real to list procedure :: addValue ! add class(*) to list generic :: add => addInteger, addChar, addReal end type list
The list derived type has two data components, firstlink, which points to the first link in its list and lastLink which points to the last link in the list. The lastLink pointer allows us to easily add values to the end of the list. Next, we have three type-bound procedures called addInteger(), addChar(), and addReal(). As one may guess, the first three procedures are used to add an integer, a character, and a real to the linked list respectively. The addValue() procedure adds class(*) values to the list and is the main add routine. The addInteger(), addChar(), and addReal() procedures are actually just wrappers to the addValue() procedure. Below is the addInteger() procedure. The only difference between addInteger(), addChar(), and addReal() is the data type dummy argument, value.
subroutine addInteger(this, value) class(list) :: this integer value class(*), allocatable :: v allocate(v,source=value) call this%addValue(v) end subroutine addInteger
The addInteger() procedure takes an integer value and allocates a class(*) with that value using sourced allocation. The value is then passed to the addValue() procedure shown below:
subroutine addValue(this, value) class(list) :: this class(*), value class(link), pointer :: newLink if (.not. associated(this%firstLink)) then this%firstLink => link(value, this%firstLink) this%lastLink => this%firstLink else newLink => link(value, this%lastLink%nextLink()) call this%lastLink%setNextLink(newLink) this%lastLink => newLink end if end subroutine addValue
The addValue() procedure takes two arguments; a list and a class(*). If the list's firstLink is not associated (i.e., points to null()), then we will add our value to the start of the list by assigning it to the list's firstLink pointer. Otherwise, we add it after the list's lastLink pointer.
Returning to the list type definition above, you will see the following statement:
generic :: add => addInteger, addChar, addReal
This statement uses an F2003 feature known as a generic-type bound procedure. Generic-type bound procedures act very much like generic interfaces, except they are specified in the derived-type and only type-bound procedures are permitted in the generic-set.
In our example above, we can invoke the add type-bound procedure and either the addInteger(), addChar(), or addReal() implementations will get called. The compiler will determine which procedure to invoke based on the data type of the actual arguments. If we pass an integer to add()'s value argument, addInteger() will get invoked, a character value will invoke addChar(), and a real value will invoke addReal().
program main use list_mod implicit none integer i type(list) :: my_list do i=1, 10 call my_list%add(i) enddo call my_list%add(1.23) call my_list%add('A') call my_list%add('B') call my_list%add('C') call my_list%printvalues() end program main % pgfortran -c list.f90 % pgfortran -c link.f90 % pgfortran -V main.f90 list.o link.o pgfortran 15.1-0 64-bit target on x86-64 Linux -tp sandybridge The Portland Group - PGI Compilers and Tools Copyright 2015, NVIDIA CORPORATION. All Rights Reserved. % a.out 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.230000 A B C
Abstract Types and Deferred Bindings
In our case study, we had a list derived type that acted as the API for our linked list. Rather than employ one implementation for the list derived type, we could choose to define some of the components and type-bound procedures for a list object and require the user to define the rest. This can be accomplished through an abstract type. An abstract type is a derived type that cannot be instantiated. Instead, it is extended and further defined by another type. The type extension too can be declared abstract, but ultimately it must be extended by a non-abstract type if it ever is to be instantiated in a program. Below is an example of list type declared abstract:
module abstract_list_mod : type, abstract :: list private class(link),pointer :: firstLink => null() ! first link in list class(link),pointer :: lastLink => null() ! last link in list class(link),pointer :: currLink => null() ! list iterator contains procedure, non_overridable :: addValue ! add value to list procedure, non_overridable :: firstValue ! get first value in list procedure, non_overridable :: reset ! reset list iterator procedure, non_overridable :: next !iterate to next value in list procedure, non_overridable :: currentValue! get current value in list procedure, non_overridable :: moreValues ! more values to iterate? generic :: add => addValue procedure(printValues), deferred :: printList ! print contents of list end type list abstract interface subroutine printValues(this) import list class(list) :: this end subroutine end interface : end module abstract_list_mod
The abstract list type above uses the link type discussed in the previous section as its underlying data structure. We have three data components, firstLink, lastLink, and currLink. The firstLink and lastLink components point to the first and last link in the list respectively. The currLink component points to the "current" link that we are processing in the list. In other words, currLink acts as a list iterator that allows us to traverse the list using inquiry functions. If we did not provide a list iterator, the user of our list type would need to understand the underlying link data structure. Instead, we take advantage of information hiding by providing a list iterator.
Our list type is declared abstract. Therefore, the following declaration and allocate statements are invalid for list:
type(list) :: my_list ! invalid because list is abstract allocate(list::x) ! invalid because list is abstract
On the other hand, the abstract type can be used in a class declaration since its dynamic type can be a non-abstract type extension. For example,
subroutine list_stuff(my_list) class(list) :: my_list class(list), pointer :: p class(list), allocatable :: a select type (my_list) class is (list) : end select end subroutine
The above usage of list is valid because we are not declaring or allocating anything with type list. Instead, we are asserting that each variable is some type extension of list.
In our list type definition above, we added the deferred binding to the printValues type-bound procedure. The deferred binding can be added to type-bound procedures that are not defined in the abstract type but must be defined in all of its non-abstract type extensions. Deferred bindings allow the author of the abstract type to dictate what procedures must be implemented by the user of the abstract type and what may or may not be overridden. F2003 also requires that a deferred binding have an interface (or an abstract interface) associated with it. The following is the syntax for deferred bindings:
procedure (interface-name), deferred :: procedure-name
Because deferred bindings have an interface associated with them, there is no => followed by an implementation-name allowed in the syntax (e.g., "procedure, deferred :: foo => bar" is not allowed).
Below is an example of a type that extends our list type above:
module integer_list_mod : type, extends(list) :: integerList contains procedure :: addInteger procedure :: printList => printIntegerList generic :: add => addInteger end type integerList : end module integer_list_mod
The integerList extends our abstract type, list. Note that printList() is defined as required by the deferred binding in list. Below is the implementation for the printList() type-bound procedure:
subroutine printIntegerList(this) class(integerList) :: this class(*), pointer :: curr call this%reset() ! reset list iterator do while(this%moreValues()) ! loop while there are values to print curr => this%currentValue() ! get current value select type(curr) type is (integer) print *, curr ! print the integer end select call this%nextValue() ! increment the list iterator end do call this%reset() ! reset list iterator end subroutine printIntegerList
In printIntegerList(), we print out the integers in our list. We first call the list reset() procedure to make sure that the list iterator is at the beginning of the list. Next, we loop through the list, calling the list's moreValues() function to determine if our list iterator has reached the end of the list. We call the list's currentValue() function to get the value that the list iterator is pointing to. We then use a select type to access the integer value and print it. Finally, we call the list's nextValue() procedure to increment the list iterator so we can access the next value.
Below is a sample program that uses our abstract list and integerList types. The sample program adds the integers one through ten to our list and then calls the integerList's printList() procedure. Next, the program traverses the list, places the integers into an array, and then prints out the array. You can download the complete abstract_list_mod and integer_list_mod modules from the PGI website.
program main use integer_list_mod implicit none integer i type(integerList) :: my_list integer values(10) do i=1, 10 call my_list%add(i) enddo call my_list%printList() print * call my_list%reset() i = 1 do while(my_list%moreValues()) values(i) = my_list%current() call my_list%next() i = i + 1 end do print *, values end program main
Below is a sample compile and run of the above program:
% pgfortran -c link.f90 % pgfortran -c abstract_list.f90 % pgfortran -c integerList.f90 % pgfortran -V main.f90 link.o abstract_list.o integerList.o pgfortran 11.6-0 64-bit target on x86-64 Linux -tp penryn Copyright 1989-2000, The Portland Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2000-2011, STMicroelectronics, Inc. All Rights Reserved. % a.out 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Polymorphism permits code reusability in the Object-Oriented Programming paradigm because the programmer can write procedures and data structures that can operate on a variety of data types and values. The programmer does not have to reinvent the wheel for every data type a procedure or a data structure will encounter. There are two types of polymorphism: procedure polymorphism and data polymorphism. Procedure polymorphism occurs when a procedure can operate on a variety of data types and values. Data polymorphism occurs when we have a pointer or allocatable variable that can operate on a variety of data types and values. The dynamic type of these variables change when we assign a target to a polymorphic pointer variable or when we use typed or sourced allocation with a polymorphic allocatable variable. Next, we looked at unlimited polymorphic objects and presented a case study where these objects can be used to create heterogeneous data structures (e.g., a list object that links together a variety of data types). Finally, we looked at how abstract types can be used to dictate requirements for type extensions and how they interact with polymorphic variables.
The author would like to thank Paul Richard Thomas and Philip Mason for submitting corrections to the code examples in earlier versions of this article.
- ©2016 NVIDIA Corporation