From malcolm@brackley.nag.co.uk Thu Mar 30 12:14:20 2000 Received: from brackley.nag.co.uk ([62.232.54.10]) by dkuug.dk (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id MAA25554 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:14:11 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from malcolm@brackley.nag.co.uk) Received: (from malcolm@localhost) by brackley.nag.co.uk (8.9.2/8.9.2) id LAA83431 for SC22WG5@dkuug.dk; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:13:10 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from malcolm) From: Malcolm Cohen Message-Id: <200003301013.LAA83431@brackley.nag.co.uk> Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.1750) Interpretation 001 To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:13:10 +0100 (BST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lawrie Schonfelder wrote: >I would agree wholeheartedly with looking again at specification and >initialization expressions. I would like to go further and revisit the need >for the draconian overly complex restrictions in this area. I constantly fall Without wishing to express an opinion on the desirability or otherwise of the various restrictions, I note that they have already been revisited for F2002. >over these restrictions when actually trying to program portable programs in >F95. I repeatedly reread this section of the standard and am still confused >as to precisely what it means and just try explaining it to novices or >programmers with a different native language from Fortran! C at least does not allow maths intrinsics in initialisation expressions. Neither does C++ (though it does allow them in "constructors"). But perhaps you have some different restrictions and languages in mind. Cheers, -- ...........................Malcolm Cohen, NAG Ltd., Oxford, U.K. (malcolm@nag.co.uk)