From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Wed Aug 6 18:51:45 2003 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h76GpjDV016194 for sc22wg5-domo; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 18:51:45 +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 mail532.nifty.com (mail532.nifty.com [202.248.37.221]) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h76GpVEc016188 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 18:51:42 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from takata@edogawa-u.ac.jp) Received: from takata-n8.edogawa-u.ac.jp (NDHC11.math.tu-dresden.de [141.30.71.180]) (authenticated) by mail532.nifty.com with ESMTP id h76GpCiC003254 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 01:51:14 +0900 Message-Id: <5.1.1.9.2.20030806185048.00d35d48@mail.edogawa-u.ac.jp> X-Sender: gaf01617@mail.edogawa-u.ac.jp X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1-Jr4 Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:51:17 +0200 To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk From: TAKATA Masayuki Subject: F95 Interpretation JP-24 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Precedence: bulk Dear Stan, J3 and WG5: WG5 returned the F95 Interpretation JP-24 to J3, as stated in Part 4 of its document N1561, which is copied below. This message is for making it easier to understand the story, of which I didn't tell in detail in Dresden to save time. Further, I'd like J3 to take this edit as appropriate as a proposed edit to J3/03-007. First of all, I agree that this edit doesn't add anything valuable to the standard. Shared-do is an obsolescent feature that everybody knows what it is. JP-24 is just a fixing of a bug unluckily found and officially reported. Don't take this as an attempt to "reveal" a well-kept secret bug. :-) I attended the August 2000 WG5 meeting when, according to the HISTORY, the answer was drafted. I clearly remember that I wrote the additional example in the DISCUSSION part, but can't remember how I agreed on the resulting EDIT. I'm sure that somebody then convinced me in some way. I think the new example given in WG5 N1561 is enough to illustrate that the current EDIT in JP-24 is not sufficient. Note that JP-24 talks about the only constraint related to this matter; it is still there, in exactly the same wording, as C826 at [168:10] of J3/03-007. Regards, Makki, who is still in Dresden in some reason > 4. Interpretation JP-24 > > The WG5 interpretation subgroup requests J3 to reconsider the edit given > in interpretation JP-24. We give below an example code that would be allowed > by the new bnf as a single construct, but should not be. > > do 10 i=1,5 ! outer > do 20 j=1,5 ! inner > ... > 10 continue ! shared > > The edit that would disallow above-mentioned code as a single construct > would read as follows: > > [127:29.5] Replace "" by > " and ". > > > ===========================INTERPRETATION JP-24================================ > NUMBER: JP-24 > TITLE: The bnf term shared-term-do-construct > KEYWORDS: DO, BNF > DEFECT TYPE: Erratum > STATUS: Passed by J3 letter ballot > > QUESTION: > > JP-24) > In 8.1.4.2, second constraint below R833 states that: > > "The do-term-shared-stmt shall be identified with a label > and all of the label-do-stmts of the shared-term-do-construct > shall refer to the same label." > > This implies a label-do-stmts of the outer-most outer-shared- > do-construct will permit not to refer to the same label, because > shared-term-do-construct does not include outer-most outer- > shared-do-construct. > > So the term "shared-term-do-construct" should be changed to > "inner-share-do-construct and outer-shared-do-construct." > > DISCUSSION: > > There is a typographical error in the question - "8.1.4.2" > should read "8.1.4.1.2". > > The following amplification of the question was provided at the > August 2000 WG5 meeting: > > The present BNF does not preclude the following as a single > construct: > > do 10 i=1,5 ! outer > do 20 j=1,5 ! outer > do 20 k=1,5 ! outer > do 20 l=1,5 ! inner > ... > 20 continue ! shared > > ANSWER: > > Agreed. There is a minor change in the suggested replacement text. > > EDIT: > > [127:29.5] Replace "" by > "". > > {The intention is to alter the second line of the second constraint > following R833. The line numbering is awry in the F95 copy being > used.} > > SUBMITTED BY: Japan > > HISTORY: 99-208 m150 Submitted > 99-221 m150 Classified as Fortran 95 interpretation > WG5-N1411 Aug-2000 Draft answer > 02-131r1 m160 Passed unanimously by J3 meeting > 03-xxx m165 Passed by J3 letter ballot > WG5-N1561 Request from WG5 to reconsider -- (Mr) Takata, Masayuki: Associate Professor Edogawa University, Nagareyama, Chiba 270-0198 Japan phone:+81-4-7152-0661ext546 fax:+81-4-7154-2490 http://www.edogawa-u.ac.jp/~takata/