From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Wed Mar 23 09:30:28 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www2.open-std.org Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 3A2DEC178DC; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:30:28 +0100 (CET) X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mk-filter-3-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-filter-3-a-1.mail.tiscali.co.uk [212.74.100.54]) by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A471C178DA for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:30:26 +0100 (CET) X-Trace: 593251997/mk-filter-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com/B2C/$b2c-THROTTLED-DYNAMIC/b2c-CUSTOMER-DYNAMIC-IP/85.211.114.239/None/John.Reid@stfc.ac.uk X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 85.211.114.239 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: John.Reid@stfc.ac.uk X-SMTP-AUTH: X-Originating-Country: GB/UNITED KINGDOM X-MUA: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.17) Gecko/20110123 SeaMonkey/2.0.12 X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApEBAKNMiU1V03Lv/2dsb2JhbAAMrnm7CoVpBIxvg0Y X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.63,230,1299456000"; d="scan'208";a="593251997" Received: from 85-211-114-239.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com (HELO [192.168.1.2]) ([85.211.114.239]) by smtp.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 23 Mar 2011 08:30:25 +0000 Message-ID: <4D89AFA0.40808@stfc.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 08:30:24 +0000 From: John Reid User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.17) Gecko/20110123 SeaMonkey/2.0.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Muxworthy Cc: sc22wg5@open-std.org Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.4416) WG informal ballot References: <20110303174947.DD0CAC3BA01@www2.open-std.org> <20110322185659.62647C178DC@www2.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20110322185659.62647C178DC@www2.open-std.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk David Muxworthy wrote: .... > 5. A contrary view > 5.1 The original project specification, N1667, was to extend the > functionality of passing Fortran arguments to C. I don't think this is correct. It says "C interoperability in the Fortran Standard provides a mechanism to share data between Fortran and C. However, it is still necessary for users to implement a translation layer for procedures that have data pointer, allocatable, assumed-shape array, or optional dummy arguments. This work item will provide additional mechanisms that allow C functions to directly handle such Fortran dummy arguments." and f08 says (15.1) "Fortran provides a means of referencing procedures that are de fined by means of the C programming language or procedures that can be described by C prototypes as de ned in 6.7.5.3 of ISO/IEC 9899:1999, even if they are not actually de fined by means of C. Conversely, there is a means of specifying that a procedure defi ned by a Fortran subprogram can be referenced from a function de ned by means of C." I see the importance of both Fortran calling C and vice-versa. For example, my group at RAL is looking to make C interfaces available to our Fortran HSL procedures. Cheers, John.