From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Mon Dec 22 23:25:20 2014 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 02DD835849D; Mon, 22 Dec 2014 23:25:19 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mail.jpl.nasa.gov (sentrion1.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.139.105]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11CD435672C for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2014 23:25:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from [137.79.7.57] (math.jpl.nasa.gov [137.79.7.57]) by smtp.jpl.nasa.gov (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id sBMMPBQn021928 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128 bits) verified NO) for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2014 14:25:12 -0800 Subject: WG5 straw ballot 8 on Fortran 2008 interpretations From: Van Snyder Reply-To: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov To: sc22wg5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Organization: Yes Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 14:25:10 -0800 Message-ID: <1419287110.19479.108.camel@math.jpl.nasa.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 (2.32.3-34.el6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-Sender: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov X-AUTH: Authorized Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk The following Fortran 2008 interpretations are being balloted: Yes No Number Title -C- --- F08/0099 VOLATILE in specification expressions There is no execution sequence for evaluation of specification expressions within a . The only requirement is that the specification expressions are evaluated, in processor- dependent order, before the first executable construct is executed. Therefore, one might infer that the value of a volatile variable that appears more than once in specification expressions could be required to be copied into an anonymous local variable, and then that value used throughout elaboration of the specification part. The answer would thereby be "The program is required to print 'T T'." A note explaining the reasoning by which the program is not required to print 'T T' would be helpful: "NOTE 7.33a If a variable that has the VOLATILE attribute appears more than once in a , its value might be different at each appearance. For example, if N has the VOLATILE attribute, the specification expressions N*N and N**2 might have different values." -Y- --- F08/0100 IMPORT statement and prior explicit declaration -Y- --- F08/0101 NAMELIST and multiple occurrences of a variable --- -N- F08/0102 MERGE and polymorphism I agree with the analysis and answer, but not the edit. Three lines into the proposed new paragraph, it says "(for both the declared and dynamic types)". Upon arriving at that statement, one wonders "Where does it say that?" One might expect that a statement prefaced with "Because..." ought to have prior supporting normative specification. The only places that "dynamic" appears in Clause 13 are in the descriptions of EXTENDS_TYPE_OF, MOVE_ALLOC, SAME_TYPE_AS, and STORAGE_SIZE. The note in the answer shows why it is necessary, but the reader ought not be required to prove this theorem. Insert "declared and dynamic" before "type and type parameters" at [368:24], and in the edit for [368:26]. Further, it does not follow that the result is polymorphic if and only if TSOURCE and FSOURCE are polymorphic, simply because they are required to have the same declared and dynamic type and type parameters. Remove "Because ... types)," from the edit (and capitalize "the"), leaving only the requirement (not the unsupported conclusion) "The result is polymorphic if and only if both TSOURCE and FSOURCE are polymorphic." -Y- --- F08/0103 Pointers to internal procedures with different host instances -Y- --- F08/0104 IEEE Inquiry Functions -Y- --- F08/0106 MOVE_ALLOC for a remote array -Y- --- F08/0108 ultimate components and coarrays -Y- --- F08/0112 STAT= and ERRMSG= in ALLOCATE and DEALLOCATE -Y- --- F08/0113 Specifiers in image control statements