From helbig@man.ac.uk  Wed Mar 29 12:18:49 2000
Received: from mailhost.rug.nl (mailhost.rug.nl [129.125.4.6])
	by dkuug.dk (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id MAA20671
	for <SC22WG5@dkuug.dk>; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:18:44 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from helbig@man.ac.uk)
Received: from gladia.astro.rug.nl (gladia.astro.rug.nl [129.125.6.17])
	by mailhost.rug.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA22264
	for <SC22WG5@dkuug.dk>; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:18:43 +0200 (MET DST)
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:17:46 +0100
Message-Id: <00032912174685@man.ac.uk>
From: helbig@man.ac.uk (Phillip Helbig)
To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.1736) Interpretation 001
X-VMS-To: SC22WG5@DKUUG.DK
X-VMS-Cc: HELBIG

> However, I tried the following code on 4 compilers 
> (Salford, NAS, Sun's F90 and NAG's F90) and they all assume 
> that the variable j in the implied DO creates the variable 
> j. Each gives an error message for the  
> INTEGER::j statement indicating that j has already been 
> defined in the scope i.e. it has been exported from the 
> module.

I assume that they print the value 11 for j?

> Module mod1

Compaq Fortran does this:

*ex
DISK$SCRATCH:[HELBIG]TEST.F90;1 15 lines

$ type test.f90
Module mod1

INTEGER :: A(10)=(/(j,j=1,10)/)

End Module mod1

Program prog1

USE mod1
INTEGER :: j

PRINT *, "j = ",j

End Program

$ fortran test
$ link test
$ r test
j =            0
$

Full checking:

$ fortran test/standard=f95

no errors.

I assume this is the correct behaviour?

XLF90 also prints j = 0.