From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Fri Jan 8 16:30:32 2016 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 ECFE33588DF; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 16:30:31 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from smtp-out-11.tiscali.co.uk (unknown [62.24.139.98]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CF1635692A for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 16:30:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.8] ([80.47.119.202]) by smtp.talktalk.net with SMTP id HYzjafbOJ7DWMHYzja9Zhm; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 15:30:28 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [80.47.119.202] Subject: Result of the WG5 straw ballot on draft Corrigendum 4 To: WG5 References: <20151224111220.60B3A3587FE@www.open-std.org> <4AA982B1265F43408480F737BE12F4D36FBE4D69@ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com> <567EAC51.4050701@stfc.ac.uk> From: John Reid Message-ID: <568FD60E.8060709@stfc.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:30:22 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <567EAC51.4050701@stfc.ac.uk> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------030600090406070805040900" X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfM5Fku0wTRltHfTfzme/X1FuhOVLWlUkMKFiuomahpDRyF1OSqmb/uCUiEYJIce0oHaRK3PtR5ioZKGk/M4h8CwWTqepe+Ffr07amf+J0Nv4av2oJ3bK wyqlM3SqPOh+vdwPBCFJhpU5DtCwBC58NF3GL8W/bk7jNK732+KL/opVksk1czuPTxvbtZ4ozZV8gnsb/lxrBFIrjHcCc/Wuvf8= Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030600090406070805040900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear all, Here is the final version of N2090. There have been no comments since I sent N2090-2 out on 26 Dec. The final version is unchanged apart from the removal of "-2". Cheers, John. John Reid wrote: > > > Whitlock, Stan wrote: >> Hi, John - N2090-1 starts: >> >> N2094 asked this question >> >> "Is N2088, with the references and notes removed, acceptable for >> submission to SC22 for publication as Corrigendum 4 for Fortran >> 2008?" >> in one of these ways. >> >> "N2094" should be "N2089". The "in one of these ways" should be removed. > > Agreed. Also David pointed out the typo "interpretions". New draft > attached. > > Cheers, > > John. > >> >> Thanks /Stan >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: j3-bounces@mailman.j3-fortran.org >> [mailto:j3-bounces@mailman.j3-fortran.org] On Behalf Of John Reid >> Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:12 AM >> To: WG5 >> Subject: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5630) Result of the WG5 straw ballot on >> draft Corrigendum 4 >> >> WG5, >> >> The omission of 8 interpretions that were accepted by J3 at its August >> meeting from J3 and WG5 processing prior to the start of the WG5 straw >> ballot on draft Corrigendum 4 renders it void. The 8 interpretions are >> the subject of a current WG5 straw ballot and J3 ballot (see N2093). >> >> The comments made in this ballot should nevertheless be taken into >> account when preparing a revised draft of Corrigendum 4. I have >> therefore prepared a draft result document that includes all the >> comments made on the draft corrigendum and this is attached. Please >> let me know as soon as possible of any omissions or errors. >> >> I request /EDIT to take account of the these comments. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> John. >> _______________________________________________ >> J3 mailing list >> J3@mailman.j3-fortran.org >> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3 >> > > > _______________________________________________ > J3 mailing list > J3@mailman.j3-fortran.org > http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3 > --------------030600090406070805040900 Content-Type: text/plain; name="N2090.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="N2090.txt" ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5 N2090 Result of the WG5 straw ballot on draft Corrigendum 4 John Reid N2089 asked this question "Is N2088, with the references and notes removed, acceptable for submission to SC22 for publication as Corrigendum 4 for Fortran 2008?" The omission of 8 interpretations that were accepted by J3 at its August meeting from J3 and WG5 processing prior to the start of this ballot renders it void. The 8 interpretations are the subject of a current WG5 straw ballot and J3 ballot (see N2093). The comments made in this ballot will nevertheless be taken into account when preparing a revised draft of Corrigendum 4. Here are the comments: Robert Corbett I vote 1) Yes. Nonetheless, the edits for Subclause 9.12 need further work. The new Note 9.64a refers to "this process" without an obvious antecedent. I assume it means the process prescribed by "The semantics of how a variable is denoted". The sentence Anything that affects this process is prohibited in this context; that includes the values of any subscripts used, and if the variable is specified by a pointer function reference, anything that affects the evaluation of that function. is troubling. If "anything" that affects the process of determining how a variable is denoted is prohibited, it is impossible to denote a variable. The values of any subscripts used affect the process of determining how a variable is denoted, and indeed the sentence goes on to says that the values of any subscripts used are prohibited. The proposed edits apply only to variables. References to subobjects of named constants also need protection. ____________________________________________________________________ Erik Kruyt Subclause 8.5.6. Remove ". from the end. _______________________________________________________________________ Bill Long I recommend the following changes (mostly the same as John’s ballot): In the paragraph introduced in subclause 6.7.1.2 at [128:15-17], "non-stopped" should be inserted between "all" and "images" at the end of the final sentence. In the paragraph introduced in subclause 6.7.3.2 at [131:16-19], "non-stopped" should be inserted between "all" and "images" at the end of the final sentence. [Note that when this is incorporated into F2015, "non-stopped" will be replaced by "active". The use of "non-stopped" here is more economical for F2008 as it avoids needing to define "active image". The "new sentence" should additionally be part of the edit instructions, and not only as part of the presentation of the paragraph after the edits are applied.] In the first line of NOTE 9.64a, change the final ASCII quotation mark to a typeset final quotation mark. [One of Van's changes - a minor editing glitch in constructing the draft corrigendum.] In both instructions for the revision in subclause 14.10 at [408:1-] insert comma before "Table 14.1" and "Table 14.2". [John's modification of one of Van's changes - a minor editing glitch in constructing the draft corrigendum.] ____________________________________________________ David Muxworthy 2) Yes, subject to any minor changes arising from the ballot on N2085. _______________________________________________________________________ John Reid I vote 2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes: In the paragraph introduced in subclause 6.7.1.2 at [128:15-17], "non-stopped" should be inserted between "all" and "images" at the end of the final sentence. In the paragraph introduced in subclause 6.7.3.2 at [131:16-19], "non-stopped" should be inserted between "all" and "images" at the end of the final sentence. [Modifications of two of Van's changes. The versions in N2088 are as approved by WG5 (see N2062 and N2080). However, I agree that Van's changes are desirable, but with a hyphen for consistency.] In the first line of NOTE 9.64a, change the final ASCII quotation mark to a typeset final quotation mark. [One of Van's changes - a minor editing glitch in constructing the draft corrigendum.] In both instructions for the revision in subclause 14.10 at [408:1-] insert comma before "Table 14.1" and "Table 14.2". [A modification of one of Van's changes - a minor editing glitch in constructing the draft corrigendum.] I would like to comment on Van's other changes: The number of the constraint introduced at [127:9+] should be C642a. [This was suggested by David in his vote on the interps, so is already "in play".] In the paragraph introduced in subclause 8.5.4 at [190:16-], replace "The value of " with "If is not an asterisk, its value" because it doesn't have a value if it is an asterisk. [The version in N2088 is as approved by WG5 (see N2042 and N2047). I think the sentence is OK because its effect is null if is an asterisk.] In the paragraph revised in subclause 9.12 at [243:6-7], delete "the" before " processing" because there might be more than one in the statement. [The version in N2088 is as approved by WG5 (see N2062 and N2080). I think the sentence is OK because it talks of " processing" which can cover more than one .] In the first line of NOTE 9.64a, replace "denotation"; with "denotation;". [The version in N2088 is as approved by WG5 (see N2062 and N2080). Van wants to apply the US rule, which conflicts with ISO practice. See, for example, 23:3 in J3/10-007r1.] _____________________________________________________________________ Van Snyder I vote 2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes. The number of the constraint introduced at [127:9+] should be C642a. In the paragraph introduced in subclause 6.7.1.2 at [128:15-17], "nonstopped" should be inserted between "all" and "images" at the end of the final sentence. In the paragraph introduced in subclause 6.7.3.2 at [131:16-19], "nonstopped" should be inserted between "all" and "images" at the end of the final sentence. In the paragraph introduced in subclause 8.5.4 at [190:16-], replace "The value of " with "If is not an asterisk, its value" because it doesn't have a value if it is an asterisk. In the paragraph revised in subclause 9.12 at [243:6-7], delete "the" before " processing" because there might be more than one in the statement. In the first line of NOTE 9.64a, replace "denotation"; with "denotation;", and change the final ASCII quotation mark to a typeset final quotation mark. In both instructions for the revision in subclause 14.10 at [408:1-] insert "of" before "Table 14.1" and "Table 14.2". --------------030600090406070805040900--