From bill@amber.ssd.csd.harris.com Fri Dec 17 11:39:32 1993 Received: from ns.dknet.dk by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA03141 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Fri, 17 Dec 1993 22:40:04 +0100 Received: from travis.csd.harris.com by ns.dknet.dk with SMTP id AA15406 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Fri, 17 Dec 1993 22:42:03 +0100 Received: from amber.ssd.csd.harris.com by travis.csd.harris.com (5.61/harris-5.1) id AA27959; Fri, 17 Dec 93 16:39:35 -0500 Received: by amber (5.61/CX/UX-5.0) id AA10548; Fri, 17 Dec 93 16:39:32 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 93 16:39:32 -0500 From: bill@amber.ssd.csd.harris.com (Bill Leonard) Message-Id: <9312172139.AA10548@amber> To: jkr@letterbox.rl.ac.uk Cc: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk In-Reply-To: <199312171749.AA28434@dkuug.dk> (jkr@letterbox.rl.ac.uk) Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.471) 006 vote (revised) X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 > Date: Fri, 17 Dec 93 17:51:38 GMT > From: jkr@letterbox.rl.ac.uk (John Reid) > Errors-To: x3j3-request@ncsa.uiuc.edu > 131 Y Reid I see no need for item 6. The text of 143/46-48 is already > clear and unambiguous. This edit was generated because of the following text in the interpretation request: > Section 10.5.2 'Logical editing' indicates that the T or F in the input > field can be followed by additional characters but gives no indication as > to whether such characters might be a kind type parameter for the logical > constant and that they should be recognized as a kind type parameter. > 154 N Reid If we are to allow a zero-sized substring in an > equivalence, we need to know where it fits within the string. > At the front seems the best and this is implied by the answer to > question 2, but I see no text in the standard. I suggest that > the edit be changed to: > EDIT: In section 14.6.3.2 [248:15], after the last sentence > in the second paragraph, add "Two zero-sized subobjects of > the same object are the same zero sized storage sequence; > the successor is the object itself.". I still think this meaning is likely to be, of all the possibilities, the most surprising to the user. It does not follow from making a non-zero-sized array degenerate into a zero-sized array. For instance, in the following example: DIMENSION A(10), B(100) EQUIVALENCE (A, B(10:20)) clearly A(1) is equivalenced to B(10). If I change the 20 to 19, 18, 17, and so on down to 10, A(1) is still equivalenced to B(10). But if I change the 20 to 9, all of a sudden A(1) is equivalenced to B(1)! Bill Leonard Harris Computer Systems Division 2101 W. Cypress Creek Road Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309 bill@ssd.csd.harris.com These opinions and statements are my own and do not reflect the opinions or positions of Harris Corporation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let's put an end to infinity. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------