From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org  Wed Sep 26 09:55:10 2012
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www.open-std.org
Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id 49A30356998; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 09:55:10 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from nag-j.co.jp (nag-j.co.jp [111.68.142.10])
	by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B65273568AE
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 09:55:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Maru6 (218-42-159-105.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp [218.42.159.105])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by nag-j.co.jp (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8Q7t37R072123
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 07:55:06 GMT
	(envelope-from malcolm@nag-j.co.jp)
Message-ID: <8E4D2FC4B86C4D5598A9884D18A647B7@Maru6>
From: "Malcolm Cohen" <malcolm@nag-j.co.jp>
To: "WG5" <sc22wg5@open-std.org>
References: <501BB236.4000004@stfc.ac.uk> <20120902160848.E514F35693A@www.open-std.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120902160848.E514F35693A@www.open-std.org>
Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.4752) Fourth WG5 ballot on interpretations
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:55:04 +0900
Organization: =?utf-8?B?5pel5pysTkFH?=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="utf-8";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

The following Fortran 2008 interpretations are being balloted:

Yes  No Number     Title

-Y-  ---  F08/0043   Executing a type-bound procedure on a coindexed
                      object
-N-  ---  F08/0048   Sequence association for coarrays
-Y-  ---  F08/0054   Requirements for needing an explicit interface
-C-  ---  F08/0055   G editing for reals
-Y-  ---  F08/0056   Non-polymorphic ALLOCATE with polymorphic SOURCE=
-Y-  ---  F08/0057   Interoperability with empty types
-Y-  ---  F08/0058   ENTRY point RESULT variable
-Y-  ---  F08/0059   Auto-targetting requirements
-Y-  ---  F08/0060   Procedure pointer assignment with an EXTERNAL target
-Y-  ---  F08/0061   Description of the CONTIGUOUS attribute misworded?
-Y-  ---  F08/0062   Mixing default initialization with DATA
                      initialization
-Y-  ---  F08/0063   G editing to a narrow output field
-Y-  ---  F08/0064   STATUS of GET_ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE
-Y-  ---  F08/0065   Should certain procedures in intrinsic modules be
                      pure?
-Y-  ---  F08/0066   Are certain expressions with pointer initialization
                      constant?
-Y-  ---  F08/0067   Passing arrays of extended type objects
-Y-  ---  F08/0068   Pointer association and extended type arrays
-Y-  ---  F08/0069   Which part of an effective argument becomes
                      undefined?
-Y-  ---  F08/0070   Finalization of INTENT(OUT) arguments
-Y-  ---  F08/0072   Final subroutines with corank
-C-  ---  F08/0073   Polymorphic auto-targetting


NO vote for F08/0048

Bill Long writes:
  "Does the interp open the door to a whole room full of "clever
   programming" opportunities? For example, you can pass a different
   element on each image."
Yes, that is precisely why I voted against this interp at every previous 
opportunity.  I think it is a bad idea to provide such a confusing feature with 
so few redeeming qualities.

(I do not expect to be on the winning side in this vote.)

COMMENT for F08/0055.

In the edits, change "with d==0" to "with d equal to 0", twice.

COMMENT for F08/0073.

The note about the edit being unnecessary if F08/0059 passes should be an 
instruction not to make the edit in that case.

Cheers,
-- 
................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.