From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Fri Sep 12 16:17:40 2003 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h8CEHeGp033820 for sc22wg5-domo; Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:17:40 +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 inf.rl.ac.uk (nfs7.inf.rl.ac.uk [130.246.72.7]) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h8CEHZCp033814 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:17:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk) Received: from numerical.cc.rl.ac.uk (numerical [130.246.8.23]) by inf.rl.ac.uk (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id h8CEHko20515 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:17:46 +0100 (BST) Received: from rl.ac.uk (jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.202]) by numerical.cc.rl.ac.uk (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA11525 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:26:45 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <3F61D86F.9000203@rl.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:30:07 +0100 From: John Reid Reply-To: j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk Organization: Rutherford Appleton Laboratory User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: WG5 Subject: New papers Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------010300070703060901060101" Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010300070703060901060101 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have placed these new papers on the server: 1573 Draft FCD of the new Standard (Maine) 1574 Changes to TR 19767 implemented at J3 meeting 165 (Snyder) 1576 Changes proposed to TR 19767 at J3 meeting 165 (Snyder) For your convenience, they are attached. I would like to draw your attention to N1576, where Van is suggesting a small change to the technical content of the modules TR that goes beyond what we decided in Dresden: D7. TR on Enhanced Module Facilities in Fortran That WG5 proposes that the technical content of the draft TR which is to be submitted to SC22 for PDTR balloting shall be as described in WG5-N1555, as perhaps modified by N1572. Van and I would appreciate comments on this suggested change. John. --------------010300070703060901060101 Content-Type: text/plain; name="N1573.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="N1573.txt" ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5 N1573 Draft FCD of the new Standard The draft FCD of the new Standard that will be considered in an informal letter ballot of WG5 is J3 document J3/03-007r1 and is available as PS, PDF, or text from ftp://ftp.j3-fortran.org/j3/doc/standing/007/ --------------010300070703060901060101 Content-Type: text/plain; name="N1574.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="N1574.txt" ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5/N1574 8 September 2003 To: WG5 From: Van Snyder Subject: Changes to TR 19767 implemented at J3 meeting 165 J3 meeting paper 03-199r1 (in ftp://ftp.j3-fortran.org/j3/doc/year/03/) is a draft of Technical Report 19767 that reflects decisions taken at the Dresden WG5 meeting, and changes proposed in WG5 meeting paper N1572, which were implemented at J3 meeting 165. An additional change, described in WG5 paper N1576, was proposed at J3 meeting 165. --------------010300070703060901060101 Content-Type: text/plain; name="N1576.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="N1576.txt" ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5/N1576 8 September 2003 To: WG5 From: Van Snyder Subject: Changes proposed to TR 19767 at J3 meeting 165 The purpose of technical report 19767 is to address the deficiencies of Fortran to support large programming projects. In a large project, it is likely that conflicts arise between names of global entities, including submodules. To reduce the possibility of name conflicts, it was proposed that the name of a submodule ought to be local to its ancestor module. This proposal was approved by a straw vote. This requires that both the ancestor module and the parent submodule be mentioned in the case of a submodule that is not a child of the module. To accomodate this, the following modification of the SUBMODULE statement was proposed: SUBMODULE ( [ : ] ) Beyond this syntax change, which affects [7:21] in 03-199r1, edits (with respect to 03-007r1) to implement this change are not extensive: [405:19,22] Insert "non-submodule" before "program unit", twice. {Submodule names are not global identifiers.} [406:9] Delete "and". [406:10] Append ", and". [406:10+] insert "(4) If the scoping unit is that of a module, its submodules". Another proposal was to require a submodule to be a child of a module, but to allow one submodule to access another by use association, provided they have the same parent module. This allows a more general (DAG instead of tree) relation between submodules of a module. It was observed that the present proposal allows one to put a module procedure interface in a submodule and its separate module procedure body in one of its descendants. Replacing the submodule hierarchy with inter-submodule use association would not allow to put a separate module procedure body in one submodule and access its corresponding module procedure interface body from a sibling submodule. --------------010300070703060901060101--