From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Thu Jun 26 00:33:38 2003 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h5PMXcAr062508 for sc22wg5-domo; Thu, 26 Jun 2003 00:33:38 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk) X-Authentication-Warning: ptah.dkuug.dk: majordom set sender to owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk using -f Received: from math.jpl.nasa.gov (math.jpl.nasa.gov [137.79.7.57]) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h5PMXQEc062503 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2003 00:33:34 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from vsnyder@math.jpl.nasa.gov) Received: from math.jpl.nasa.gov (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by math.jpl.nasa.gov (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h5PMXOJe015278; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:33:25 -0700 Received: from math.jpl.nasa.gov (vsnyder@localhost) by math.jpl.nasa.gov (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) with ESMTP id h5PMXOWF015274; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:33:24 -0700 Message-Id: <200306252233.h5PMXOWF015274@math.jpl.nasa.gov> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Cc: Richard Maine Reply-to: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.2827) Submodule association and host association In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:19:57 PDT." <200306252221.h5PMLeW1062397@dkuug.dk> From: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:33:24 -0700 Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Precedence: bulk Richard Maine wrote: > I quite agree that modules that can be imbedded within other > modules would be a new feature (and one that I'd have serious > reservations about also). If we wanted to allow it, we'd have to > actively add new syntax and answer several new questions about how > it worked. I don't favor that at the moment, and it certainly isn't > anything that has been in previous drafts of the TR. I would think it > something that would add significant complication to the TR. I didn't advocate this. All I did was point out that some people have asked about it. That means that it may in the future be on the table. If we use Lawrie's submodule association for the relation between a submodule and its parent, it may take extra words to make host association work when a submodule is embedded within a module or another submodule. My only point is that we ought to think farther down the road than August 1. I'm pretty sure that if we choose submodule association, it would still be possible to provide for embedded submodules in some future revision of the standard, so we wouldn't be closing the door on potential wishes some people may have for future evolution of Fortran. It may just make it a little bit awkward for them to explain how association into submodules works. I'm still undecided about whether a submodule ought to access its parent by host association or as Lawrie wants it. When I was developing early drafts of the TR, I decided that none of the forms of association we have are ideal for this job. I agree with Lawrie that host association isn't ideal. I still haven't decided whether it's bad enough that we want to add a new form of association. -- Van Snyder | What fraction of Americans believe Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov | Wrestling is real and NASA is fake? Any alleged opinions are my own and have not been approved or disapproved by JPL, CalTech, NASA, Sean O'Keefe, George Bush, the Pope, or anybody else.