From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Wed Mar 16 14:19:48 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 2A0E43587BB; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 14:19:48 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org X-Greylist: delayed 4320 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at www5.open-std.org; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 14:19:47 CET Received: from aserp1050.oracle.com (aserp1050.oracle.com [141.146.126.70]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3683C356D1C for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 14:19:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com (aserp1040.oracle.com [141.146.126.69]) by aserp1050.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u2GC7lLA013974 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:07:48 GMT Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u2GC7Qn5002358 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:07:26 GMT Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u2GC7QB5000641 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:07:26 GMT Received: from abhmp0009.oracle.com (abhmp0009.oracle.com [141.146.116.15]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u2GC7Og1032107; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:07:25 GMT Received: from [10.132.140.77] (/10.132.140.77) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 05:07:24 -0700 Message-ID: <56E94BB6.1000407@oracle.com> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 05:04:06 -0700 From: Robert Corbett Reply-To: robert.corbett@oracle.com Organization: Oracle America User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; SunOS sun4u; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110814 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: fortran standards email list for J3 CC: "Bader, Reinhold" , Forcheck , "'WG5'" Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5685) AW: RE: [ukfortran] F08/C201 References: <20160314163910.3E1A035730E@www.open-std.org> <20160315002027.D448E3582CC@www.open-std.org> <20160315200858.1DA5E3587BB@www.open-std.org> <20160316075309.C2B803571CA@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20160316075309.C2B803571CA@www.open-std.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: aserp1040.oracle.com [141.146.126.69] Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk On 03/16/16 00:46, Bader, Reinhold wrote: > Hi Erik, > > my impression is that C201 only closes a hole that would otherwise permit improper nesting of statements with respect to executable constructs, e.g., > > block > ... > end subroutine > end block > > Cheers > Reinhold > You and Erik raise a fair point. Constraint C201 has the same effect on the syntax as would be achieved by deleting the alternatives /end-function-stmt/, /end-mp-subprogram-stmt/, /end-program-stmt/, and /end-subroutine-stmt/ from rule R214 (rule R215 of 16-007), which is the syntax definition of an /action-stmt/. I suspect that the intended purpose of including those alternatives is to indicate that those forms of END statements are executable constructs. That does not work, because none of the cases where one of those forms of END statements is produced by the grammar are derived (indirectly) from the syntax term /executable-construct/ because of the constraint. Robert Corbett