From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Mon Mar 12 16:29:23 2012 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 210BA9DB113; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:29:23 +0100 (CET) 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 www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BB5A9DB112 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:29:21 +0100 (CET) X-Trace: 736923836/mk-filter-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com/B2C/$b2c-THROTTLED/TalkTalk_Customer/2.101.24.138/None/John.Reid@stfc.ac.uk X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 2.101.24.138 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: John.Reid@stfc.ac.uk X-SMTP-AUTH: X-Originating-Country: XX/UNKNOWN X-MUA: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Firefox/10.0.2 SeaMonkey/2.7.2 X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApQDAJYVXk8CZRiK/2dsb2JhbAAMNbRZA4RVGyU9FhgDAgECAUsNCAK/CIs8hUUElUyFVopNgmM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,571,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="736923836" Received: from host-2-101-24-138.as13285.net (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([2.101.24.138]) by smtp.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 12 Mar 2012 15:28:58 +0000 Message-ID: <4F5E163F.8030906@stfc.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:29:03 +0000 From: John Reid User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Firefox/10.0.2 SeaMonkey/2.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: WG5 Subject: Vote on N1904 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk Please answer the following question "Is N1904 ready for forwarding to SC22 as the DTS?" in one of these ways. 3) No, for the following reasons. Page 9, C407a. After "that" add "does not have INTENT(OUT) and". Reason: INTENT(OUT) causes the dummy argument to become undefined, so is a sort of assignment. Allowing it is inconsistent with C407b - the intention is that as assumed-type object be altered only by a C function. Page 10, C1255, line 2, change "or" to ", a variable that has the ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute, a variable of assumed shape, a variable of assumed type, a variable of assumed character length, or". Reason: We are currently saying that all these variables are disallowed as arguments of a procedure with the BIND attribute. This is at variance with the whole intent of the TS. This change perhaps goes too far. It allows a procedure to have the BIND attribute despite it being impossible to write a C function prototype with which it interoperates. If this is felt to be important, more constraints along the lines of C516 could be added. Page 17, 8.2, line 3 and page 20, end of para under Table 8.1. Change "scalar or is an assumed-shape, explicit-shape, or assumed-size array" to "scalar, an array whose shape is known, or an assumed-size array" or "an object whose shape is known or an assumed-size array." Reason: The present wording excludes the case of an actual argument of assumed rank. It is also misleading since there is nothing in the descriptor to distinguish an assumed-shape array from an explicit-shape array (and no need for it). In addition, I suggest this change: Page 15, RANK. In the Example para, change "effective" to "actual". Reason: The meaning is the same in this case, but the reader has to think it through with "effective".