(j3.2006) Question about co-arrays

Van Snyder van.snyder
Wed Feb 7 20:23:18 EST 2007

On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 17:05 -0800, Aleksandar Donev wrote:
> Firstly, as I said before, I am all for saying that C_PTR et al. act
> as if they are derived types with pointer components, and then
> deleting their special casing in favor of using the constraints
> already there for pointer components. But, I did not hear anyone
> actually agreeing with me, so I am assuming this is not attractive.

07-161 will try to do this.  We'll see if subgroup even brings it to
plenary, and then if it even gets a second.  If we don't do this, there
are lots more things to track down than mentioned in UTI 192.  For
example, [230:20-22] an I/O list item can't have a POINTER component
unless the list item is processed by UDDTIO.  What about a C_LOC?

What else have we overlooked?

(Does this need an interp?)

(The itemized list on [230-231] should probably be an enumerated list.)

Van Snyder                    |  What fraction of Americans believe 
Van.Snyder at jpl.nasa.gov       |  Wrestling is real and NASA is fake?
Any alleged opinions are my own and have not been approved or
disapproved by JPL, CalTech, NASA, the President, or anybody else.

More information about the J3 mailing list