From maine@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov Tue Mar 10 00:59:25 1992 Received: from altair.dfrf.nasa.gov by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA08735; Tue, 10 Mar 92 00:59:25 +0100 Received: by altair.dfrf.nasa.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00533; Mon, 9 Mar 92 16:00:21 PST Date: Mon, 9 Mar 92 16:00:21 PST From: maine@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov (Richard Maine) Message-Id: <9203100000.AA00533@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov> To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk In-Reply-To: Lawrie Schonfelder's message of Mon, 09 Mar 92 13:29:00 GMT <9203091336.AA16864@danpost2.uni-c.dk> Subject: (SC22WG5.40) is1539_1 a X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 On Mon, 09 Mar 92 13:29:00 GMT, Lawrie Schonfelder said: ... [lots omitted] ... > SUBROUTINE s_ass_s(var,expr) > type(VARYING_STRING),INTENT(OUT) :: var > type(VARYING_STRING),INTENT(IN) :: expr > ! assign a string value to a string variable overriding default assignement > ! reallocates string variable to size of string value and copies characters > IF(ASSOCIATED(var%chars))DEALLOCATE(var%chars) > ALLOCATE(var%chars(1:LEN(expr))) > var%chars = expr%chars > ENDSUBROUTINE s_ass_s Isn't the above use of ASSOCIATED illegal? The definition of ASSOCIATED (section 13.13.13) says that the pointer association status of its argument must not be undefined. Section 14.6.2.1 says that the pointer association status of a pointer is initially undefined. I can't at the moment find specific words that would explicitly apply to a pointer component of an intent(out) argument, but I would expect the pointer association status of var%chars in the above sample to be undefined. I certainly don't see how it could be otherwise. The above code seems to assume that the initial the pointer association status of var%chars will be dissassociated initially. Furthermore, even if the pointer association status of the actual argument were defined when this routine was called, I think that the intent(out) should probably make the pointer association status in the formal argument undefined because it might not necessarily be copied from the actual argument. The same issue comes up at least one other place in the sample code Lawrie provided. -- Richard Maine maine@altair.dfrf.nasa.gov