From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom9=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Mon Oct 5 07:20:03 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom9 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom9@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 4A0DF358A0B; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 07:20:03 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org X-Greylist: delayed 399 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at www5.open-std.org; Mon, 05 Oct 2020 07:20:02 CEST Received: from nag-j.co.jp (bvdeuz19.secure.ne.jp [180.222.80.19]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4038A35837D for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 07:20:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 5332 invoked from network); 5 Oct 2020 14:13:19 +0900 Received: from unknown (HELO Maru10) (218.42.159.105) by 0 with SMTP; 5 Oct 2020 14:13:19 +0900 From: "Malcolm Cohen" To: "'WG5 List'" References: <20201004151950.021CA358986@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20201004151950.021CA358986@www.open-std.org> Subject: RE: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.6289) WG5 letter ballot 1 on Fortran 2018 interpretations Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 14:13:19 +0900 Message-ID: <063501d69ad6$3d426a90$b7c73fb0$@nag-j.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQKfF/pHNkDD30lk/ke1q9yeT0Gzy6f3PsnQ Content-Language: ja Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk This is not my vote... I am considering: -N- --- F18/015 Example in C.6.8 is wrong I have three problems with this interp; the first two are the same = issues Anton raised. Before I commit my suggestions to a vote, I am = floating this in hope of receiving some enlightening comments... (1) I don't see a strong reason to follow the existing formula precisely - = 0.5% is not terribly close to 1% so the 1% comment is a bit misleading = anyway. So how about: ! With 10+ images, keep at least 1% spare. images_spare =3D MERGE(0,CEILING(NUM_IMAGES()/100.0),NUM_IMAGES()<10) Obviously this keeps more spare images than the original (the same = number up to 100, +1 when >100). (2) I agree that a variable with the same name as an intrinsic is not good = style. "team_num" would be okay. But I do not agree that the intrinsic should be used at line 88 - that = should be the variable. (3) I find the use of STAT=3D followed by ignoring the result to be very = poor style indeed - unacceptably poor. I note that other places have = e.g. IF (STATUS/=3D0 .AND. STATUS/=3DSTAT_FAILED_IMAGE) EXIT outer I think this should be the case for the END TEAM and its following SYNC = ALL statement. Or, if there is some good reason why not, that needs to be at least = briefly explained in a comment after each of those statements. Cheers, --=20 ..............Malcolm Cohen, NAG Oxford/Tokyo.