From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Mon Jul 18 14:36:57 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 124913568B2; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:36:57 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mail-vx0-f175.google.com (mail-vx0-f175.google.com [209.85.220.175]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B6D35687B for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:36:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: by vxh2 with SMTP id 2so2332844vxh.34 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:36:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.67.116 with SMTP id m20mr6403654vdt.52.1310992614364; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.176.138 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:36:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E1F384D.5090604@moene.org> References: <20110711161150.84E00356883@www.open-std.org> <4E1F384D.5090604@moene.org> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 06:36:54 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4489) Ballot on N1866 From: "Rasmussen, Craig" To: fortran standards email list for J3 Cc: WG5 , John Reid Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk > On 07/11/2011 06:02 PM, John Reid wrote: > > Please answer the following question "Is N1866 ready for forwarding to > SC22 as the PDTR?" in one of these ways. > It looks like I've missed the deadline for the vote (I would have voted for choice 2). I read N1866 carefully last week and have a few minor suggestions for the revised document: 1. Pg 9, line 10: I believe there is extraneous space between "A" and "shall". 2. Table 5.3: Is there a reason all of the lines aren't right justified? 3. sizeof() usage: The sizeof() usage in elem_len description seems awkward to me (for example, pg 17, line 13): Consider changing to, for example, "elem_len shall be the number of characters in an element of the object times the sizeof() function applied to a scalar of the character type." 4. NOTE 5.7: I believe the standard uses a comma before "and" in a list, so the note should read "... to set the rank, attribute, type, and element length." 5. NOTE 5.8: I believe there is a missing hyphen. The end of the note should read "... for a Fortran assumed-shape array." 6. Pg. 20 line 32 (for example): Maybe I missed it but it's not clear to me from the specification of the functions in 5.3.5 that zero-based indexing is to be used for the bounds arrays. The examples for CFI_section and CFI_select_part use array declarations with a lower bounds of 1 in Fortran but this is the least complicated choice. It would be helpful if at least one of the examples were for an array pointer with lower bounds other than 1. Cheers, Craig