From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org  Mon Aug 12 15:50:08 2013
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 C5E44357220; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 15:50:07 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com (e9.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.139])
	by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018F135694D
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 15:49:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from /spool/local
	by e9.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org> from <cdchen@ca.ibm.com>;
	Mon, 12 Aug 2013 09:49:43 -0400
Received: from d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (9.56.250.167)
	by e9.ny.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.109) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted;
	Mon, 12 Aug 2013 09:49:41 -0400
Received: from d01relay05.pok.ibm.com (d01relay05.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.237])
	by d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A056B6E803F
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 09:49:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217])
	by d01relay05.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r7CDndA5113146
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 09:49:39 -0400
Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r7CDndl2029223
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 10:49:39 -0300
Received: from d25ml04.torolab.ibm.com (d25ml04.torolab.ibm.com [9.26.29.97])
	by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id r7CDndMM029206;
	Mon, 12 Aug 2013 10:49:39 -0300
In-Reply-To: <20130710091604.2E25F35700C@www.open-std.org>
References: <20130710091604.2E25F35700C@www.open-std.org>
Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5028) WG5 vote on draft TS on further coarray
	features
X-KeepSent: 370DCA02:3FDE20DB-85257BC5:004B9237;
 type=4; name=$KeepSent
To: fortran standards email list for J3 <j3@mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Cc: j3-bounces@mailman.j3-fortran.org, WG5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org>
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.3FP4 SHF39 May 13, 2013
Message-ID: <OF370DCA02.3FDE20DB-ON85257BC5.004B9237-85257BC5.004BF4AE@ca.ibm.com>
From: Daniel C Chen <cdchen@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 09:49:38 -0400
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D25ML04/25/M/IBM(Release 8.5.3FP3|November 15, 2012) at
 08/12/2013 09:49:39
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; 
	Boundary="0__=0ABBF156DFD814A78f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBF156DFD814A7"
Content-Disposition: inline
X-TM-AS-MML: No
X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER
x-cbid: 13081213-7182-0000-0000-0000080D94AF
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

--0__=0ABBF156DFD814A78f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBF156DFD814A7
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Please answer the following question "Is N1983 ready for forwarding to
SC22 as the DTS?" in one of these ways.

1) Yes.
2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes.
3) No, for the following reasons.
4) Abstain.

My vote is "NO" because

1. It is not clear how the team variable that identifies all image is
initialized.
2. It is not clear how the state of the failed image is handled (i.e.
Should it undo everything up to the failing point?).
3. There are also issues raised by others that need to be addressed.

Daniel

XL Fortran Development - IBM Toronto Software Lab
Phone: 905-413-3056
Tie: 969-3056
Email: cdchen@ca.ibm.com
http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/fortran/xlfortran
--0__=0ABBF156DFD814A78f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBF156DFD814A7
Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline

<html><body>
<p><font size="2" face="Courier New">Please answer the following question &quot;Is N1983 ready for forwarding to </font><br>
<font size="2" face="Courier New">SC22 as the DTS?&quot; in one of these ways. </font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="Courier New">1) Yes.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="Courier New">2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes. </font><br>
<font size="2" face="Courier New">3) No, for the following reasons.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="Courier New">4) Abstain.</font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif">My vote is &quot;NO&quot; because</font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif">1. It is not clear how the team variable that identifies all image is initialized.</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif">2. It is not clear how the state of the failed image is handled (i.e. Should it undo everything up to the failing point?).</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif">3. There are also issues raised by others that need to be addressed.</font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif">Daniel</font><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif"><br>
XL Fortran Development - IBM Toronto Software Lab<br>
Phone: 905-413-3056 &nbsp; <br>
Tie: 969-3056 &nbsp; <br>
Email: cdchen@ca.ibm.com<br>
<a href="http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/fortran/xlfortran">http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/fortran/xlfortran</a></font></body></html>
--0__=0ABBF156DFD814A78f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBF156DFD814A7--

