(j3.2006) badly worded semantics for the IMPORT statement

Van Snyder van.snyder
Tue Dec 4 18:33:58 EST 2007

Robert Corbett wrote:
> I don't think J3 intended for it to be standard conforming.  From an
> implementor's POV, I see no reason for the restriction.  Fortran 90
> and later versions of Fortran require two or more compilation passes,
> which makes the restriction unnecessary.  The restriction might be
> there to enforce someone's idea of good style; otherwise, I see no
> point to it.

Isn't this controversy the definition of "an interp is needed?"

More information about the J3 mailing list