From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Tue Aug 18 02:14:13 2015 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 E116635689C; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 02:14:13 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mail.jpl.nasa.gov (mailhost.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.139.106]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196F7356679 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 02:14:09 +0200 (CEST) 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 t7I0E3QT024202 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128 bits) verified NO) for ; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 17:14:06 -0700 Subject: [Re: Straw ballot on interps] From: Van Snyder Reply-To: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov To: sc22wg5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Organization: Yes Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 17:14:03 -0700 Message-ID: <1439856843.12691.378.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 Yes No Number Title -Y- --- F08/0105 Is the ASYNCHRONOUS attribute allowed with the VALUE attribute? -C- --- F08/0110 Interdependence of specifier values in input/output statements -Y- --- F08/0115 ASYNCHRONOUS and argument passing -Y- --- F08/0116 Interoperable procedures -Y- --- F08/0117 TARGET and coindexed arguments -C- --- F08/0118 Subobject of variable in variable definition context -Y- --- F08/0119 Branching to END BLOCK and END CRITICAL -Y- --- F08/0120 Is the name of a procedure pointer a local identifier? -Y- --- F08/0121 Add to introduction defined operations in specification exprs -C- --- F08/0122 Types with coarray components -Y- --- F08/0123 SPACING intrinsic -Y- --- F08/0124 Coindexed object with polymorphic subcomponent -Y- --- F08/0126 Can cobounds be referenced in the same type declaration? -Y- --- F08/0127 May an initial line begin with a semicolon? -C- --- F08/0129 Is CLASS(type) required to refer to a prior type definition? -Y- --- F08/0130 Does coarray allocation sync even with stopped images? -Y- --- F08/0131 Are the changes to C_LOC in the 2010 revision intentional? -Y- --- F08/0132 Can a procedure pointer be declared with an interface block? -Y- --- F08/0133 Is unallocated actual associated with nonallocatable dummy OK? -Y- --- F08/0134 in an image control statement -C- --- F08/0135 Vector subscripted actual makes VALUE dummy undefinable? -Y- --- F08/0136 Argument correspondence with VALUE and ASYNCHRONOUS -Y- --- F08/0137 Result of TRANSFER when MOLD is an array with element size zero Comments: F08/0110 I agree with John's improvement to the edit for [243:5-7 9.12p6] F08/0118 I agree with John's suggestion to remove the statement label in the question. In the original submission (14-240) there were four labeled statements that were referenced by the text of the question. When that was reduced to one statement (14-240r1) the label should have been removed. Should 14-240 be listed in the history? I don't think it got to /INTERP before 14-240r1. The edits might be slightly improved by replacing "the shall not" with "neither the nor any subobject of the shall" rather than "the or any subobject of the shall not" at [170:19] and [184:14], and nearly the same thing without syntax font and the hyphen at [171:12]. F08/0122 I agree with John's suggestion to improve the editor's instructions. F08/0129 The position of the edit should be [10-007r1:52:6+ 4.3.1.2p1+] or [12-007:52:6+ 4.3.1.2p1+], not [12-007:6+ 4.3.1.2p1+]. F08/0135 I agree with John's observation concerning coordination with Corrigendum 1, and his suggested revised edit.