From jkr@jkr.cc.rl.ac.uk Thu Mar 29 15:12:00 2001 Received: from nameserv.rl.ac.uk (nameserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.135.129]) by dkuug.dk (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id PAA14205 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2001 15:12:00 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jkr@jkr.cc.rl.ac.uk) Received: from jkr.cc.rl.ac.uk (jkr.cc.rl.ac.uk [130.246.8.20]) by nameserv.rl.ac.uk (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA24538 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:11:59 +0100 Received: (from jkr@localhost) by jkr.cc.rl.ac.uk (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) id OAA25192 for SC22WG5@dkuug.dk; Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:13:58 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:13:58 +0100 (BST) From: John Reid Message-Id: <200103291313.OAA25192@jkr.cc.rl.ac.uk> To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk Subject: Final result of the ballot on interpretations MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5-N1428 Results of the ballot on interpretations John Reid, 29 March 2001 90/ JP 14 15 32 73 75 197 12 Cohen y y y y yc y y Gorelik y y y y y y y Morgan y y y y y y y Muxworthy y y y y yc yc y North y y y y y y y Schoenauer y y y y y y y Snyder y y y y yc y y Takata y y y y yc y y Whitlock y y y y y y y Comments 75 Cohen Please fix the typo in the QUESTION section: viz > !Alternative: CALL t_asgn_t(a,b) should be > !Alternative: CALL t_asgn_t(t_plus_t,a) 75 Muxworthy "Yes" to 00075 on the assumption that Makki's point is addressed. 75 Snyder With the change noticed by Maki 75 Takata The example in the QUESTION includes: > PURE FUNCTION t_plus_t(a,b) > TYPE(t) t_plus_t,a,b > INTENT(IN) a,b > t_plus_t = a !defined assignment > !Alternative: CALL t_asgn_t(a,b) > t_plus_t%value = t_plus_t%value + b%value > END FUNCTION The commented-out CALL statement should read: !Alternative: CALL t_asgn_t(t_plus_t,a) This should be mentioned in the ANSWER, or, preferably, the QUESTION itself be amended accordingly. F90/000197 Muxworthy The answer to interp F90/000197 is correct but not helpful. Section 13.14.76 of F95 (13.13.75 in F90) is the only place in the document which refers to "machine representable numbers", while the summary section 13.11.12 uses the term "processor number" which is again the only usage. The remainder of the floating point manipulation functions deal with model numbers, as noted at 13.7. NEAREST is thus different from the other functions but it is easy to overlook this. The example used in the description still refers to the basic model however and would appear to indicate that NEAREST(X,1.) will normally have the same value as X + SPACING(X). I am not suggesting a change to the interpretation answer but it would be helpful to have a note in F200x highlighting this difference, and giving an example of when NEAREST(X,1.) is different from X + SPACING(X). Is this likely to be true only at extreme values? ........................................................... All items passed unanimously. 75 clearly needs the change suggested in the comments. I declare that it is the modified 75 that has passed.