From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Thu Jan 10 00:25:16 2013 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 8F683356A42; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 00:25:16 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from exprod6og116.obsmtp.com (exprod6og116.obsmtp.com [64.18.1.37]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B410E356A41 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 00:25:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from CFWEX01.americas.cray.com ([136.162.34.11]) (using TLSv1) by exprod6ob116.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUO3gkT89aQktz/ZSyDth2hA1rkzTDW+T@postini.com; Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:26:42 PST Received: from fortran.us.cray.com (172.31.19.200) by CFWEX01.americas.cray.com (172.30.88.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.318.1; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:26:40 -0600 Message-ID: <50EDE097.8030207@cray.com> Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:26:47 -0600 From: Bill Long Reply-To: Organization: Cray Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sc22wg5 Subject: Vote on Corrigendum 2 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 N1948, with the references and notes removed, acceptable for submission to SC22 for publication as Corrigendum 2 for Fortran 2008?" in one of these ways. 1) Yes. 2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes. 3) No, for the following reasons. 4) Abstain. I vote 2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes. In the instructions for the change to Subclause 15.3.4, I would prefer to change "before C1505 add" to "after constraint C1504 insert" so that it matches the style of similar instructions earlier in the document. ----------------------------------------------------- Other comments (not change requests): In Subclause 1.6.2, the list of changes between f2003 and f2008 is presented as sequence of paragraphs. Similar lists for the other, similar subclauses are \bullet lists. This seems stylistically inconsistent. {This is a comment only on the style, not on the words in the new text for the standard. Style of the standard text is easily "fixed" later when this is incorporated into f201x.} In Subclause 4.5.2.3, the new constraint disallows type parameters in a sequence type. Do we still need the "no type parameters" requirements in the subsequent text at [62:23] and [63:1]? {This is a question about the completeness of the edits from the interp. Perhaps addressed as editorial issues later.} Cheers, Bill -- Bill Long longb@cray.com Fortran Technical Support & voice: 651-605-9024 Bioinformatics Software Development fax: 651-605-9142 Cray Inc./Cray Plaza, Suite 210/380 Jackson St./St. Paul, MN 55101