From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Wed May 29 13:58:20 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 7C4C6356EA6; Wed, 29 May 2013 13:58:20 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from exprod6og107.obsmtp.com (exprod6og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.1.208]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74FDF356E91 for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 13:58:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from CFWEX01.americas.cray.com ([136.162.34.11]) (using TLSv1) by exprod6ob107.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUaXtTLl59XJEGLRwfx/33cxCzGTBmZI9@postini.com; Wed, 29 May 2013 04:58:19 PDT Received: from fortran.us.cray.com (172.31.19.200) by CFWEX01.americas.cray.com (172.30.88.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.342.3; Wed, 29 May 2013 06:56:27 -0500 Message-ID: <51A5EDD5.7040308@cray.com> Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 07:00:21 -0500 From: Bill Long Reply-To: Organization: Cray Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: , sc22wg5 Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5006) AW: AW: Corrections to TS29113 References: <20130527194800.755D0356E40@www.open-std.org> <20130528064313.2D3EA356EC9@www.open-std.org> <20130528175553.29F77356E2E@www.open-std.org> <20130528195028.EDA22356E76@www.open-std.org> <20130528215920.3F54A356922@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20130528215920.3F54A356922@www.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 Arg! Ignore the comments about C535b versus C535c - I was looking at the wrong document. Reinhold was, of course, right on those. Cheers, Bill On 5/28/13 5:02 PM, Bill Long wrote: > > > On 5/28/13 2:43 PM, Bader, Reinhold wrote: >> Here a modified version of section (A): >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> (A) Assumed rank entities. >> >> The Fortran lower bounds of an assumed-rank dummy argument that does >> not have the POINTER or ALLOCATABLE attribute should be one. Furthermore, >> C532 must be loosened in order to allow assumed-rank entities to >> have the POINTER or ALLOCATABLE attribute. >> >> EDITS: >> >> In section 5.2, after C535c, insert > > C535b ? 5.2 does not currently have a C535c. >> >> "The lower bounds of an assumed-rank entity argument associated with a >> non-pointer non-allocatable array are 1 > > Better in this subclause. Maybe clearer if "that is" follows "entity". > No hyphens in nonpointer or nonallocatable. > >> ; its extents are those of its >> effective argument. > > This is already covered in 6.3. > >> The size, bounds, and shape of an unallocated allocatable or a >> disassociated pointer assumed-rank entity are undefined; the > > I think this is already true in general. > >> size, bounds, and shape of an allocated allocatable or an >> associated pointer assumed-rank entity are assumed from its >> effective argument." > > This is already covered in 6.3. > >> >> The same text is added at the end of section 9.5, after C535c. > > C535b. > >> >> Before the edits for 5.3.8.7 in section 9.5, add >> >> "{In 5.3.8.4, change C532 as follows} >> >> C532 An array with the POINTER or ALLOCATABLE attribute ~[that is >> not an assumed rank entity (5.3.8.7)] shall have an array-spec >> that is a deferred-shape-spec-list." > > I agree this needs to be fixed. Good catch. > > Cheers, > Bill > > >> >> (the ~[...] text is added and hence gets underwaves). >> >> Further comment: For the C descriptor, section 8.3.3 already specifies >> the lower bound for a non-allocatable non-pointer array as zero. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- 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