From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Wed May 29 16:46:19 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 32637356EF7; Wed, 29 May 2013 16:46:19 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from bulk.mail.timico.net (ndc1-bulk01.mail.timico.net [62.105.160.41]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F31C0356EAC for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 16:46:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [62.105.160.40] (helo=relay.mail.timico.net) by bulk.mail.timico.net with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Uhhdc-0001mm-K8 for sc22wg5@open-std.org; Wed, 29 May 2013 15:46:04 +0100 Received: from [80.175.48.54] (helo=mail4.ukisp.com) by relay.mail.timico.net with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Uhhdc-0007d8-LB for sc22wg5@open-std.org; Wed, 29 May 2013 15:46:04 +0100 Received: (qmail 26634 invoked by uid 399); 29 May 2013 14:46:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO xps435) (86.26.160.183) by mail4.ukisp.com with ESMTPM; 29 May 2013 14:46:04 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 86.26.160.183 From: "Ian Chivers" To: "'Bader, Reinhold'" , "'fortran standards email list for J3'" , "'WG5'" 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> <20130529115820.DF87A356E9B@www.open-std.org> <20130529120239.D28BB356EA6@www.open-std.org> <001001ce5c6f$70430a10$50c91e30$@chivers@chiversandbryan.co.uk> <20130529144303.5CA92356EBE@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20130529144303.5CA92356EBE@www.open-std.org> Subject: RE: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.5010) AW: (j3.2006) AW: AW: AW: Corrections to TS29113 Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 15:45:46 +0100 Message-ID: <000401ce5c7b$3a6407d0$af2c1770$@chivers@chiversandbryan.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AQHOXHbbJQMweb2/KUOanuTwwmAIi5kcOelQgAADTQA= Content-Language: en-gb Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk I'll add them. Thanks for the quick response. I working on the August edition of Fortran Forum at the moment. Cheers Ian -----Original Message----- From: ukfortran [mailto:ukfortran-bounces@lists.accu.org] On Behalf Of Bader, Reinhold Sent: 29 May 2013 15:43 To: fortran standards email list for J3; 'WG5' Subject: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.5010) AW: (j3.2006) AW: AW: AW: = Corrections to TS29113 Hello Ian,=20 "Array descriptor" lumps together rather a lot. Perhaps this can be = split into BIND(C) interfaces support descriptor dummy arguments C interface to descriptors (ISO_Fortran_binding.h) (although I agree that one without the other is not really useful). Furthermore, add Extended ISO_C_BINDING module procedure semantics (cf. 8.1 of the TS) > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: j3-bounces@mailman.j3-fortran.org [mailto:j3-bounces@mailman.j3-=20 > fortran.org] Im Auftrag von Ian Chivers > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. Mai 2013 16:15 > An: 'fortran standards email list for J3'; 'WG5' > Cc: 'Bill Long' > Betreff: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5008) AW: AW: AW: Corrections to=20 > TS29113 >=20 > In the light of the publication of >=20 > ISO/IEC TS 29113:2012 >=20 > Tobias Burnus notified us about the document and suggested the=20 > following entries for inclusion in the compiler conformance table. >=20 > http://www.fortranplus.co.uk/resources/fortran_2003_2008_compiler_supp > ort > .pd > f >=20 > OPTIONAL with BIND(C) > Assumed type > Assumed rank > RANK intrinsic > Array descriptor > ASYNCHRONOUS changes >=20 > does anyone have any other suggestions/recommendations >=20 > cheers >=20 > Ian chivers and Jane Sleightholme >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: j3-bounces@mailman.j3-fortran.org=20 > [mailto:j3-bounces@mailman.j3-fortran.org] On Behalf Of Bader,=20 > Reinhold > Sent: 29 May 2013 13:02 > To: WG5 > Cc: Bill Long > Subject: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5008) AW: AW: AW: Corrections to TS29113 >=20 > Hello Bill, >=20 > OK. I've attached an updated version of the complete draft; in=20 > particular I've also added edits for section (D). >=20 > Regards > Reinhold >=20 > > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org [mailto:owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org] > > Im Auftrag von Bill Long > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. Mai 2013 13:58 > > An: longb@cray.com; sc22wg5 > > Betreff: (SC22WG5.5007) (j3.2006) AW: AW: Corrections to TS29113 > > > > Arg! Ignore the comments about C535b versus C535c - I was looking=20 > > 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=20 > > >> 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=20 > > >> 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 > > >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > J3 mailing list > J3@mailman.j3-fortran.org > http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3 _______________________________________________ ukfortran mailing list http://lists.accu.org/mailman/listinfo/ukfortran