(j3.2006) question about co-array definition and synchronization

Bill Long longb
Wed Jun 20 19:35:47 EDT 2007

Michael Ingrassia wrote:

>Consider the program
>	X = 100
>which is intended to conform to 07-007r2 syntax (but may not).
>Each image defines its local piece of co-array X, in segments that I believe
>are all unordered with respect to each other, i.e. can all be done in

The above sentence would be clearer if "local piece of" were deleted.  
Each image has a co-array named X.

>Is this draft-standard-conformable?
>If so, how does it not fall afoul of the rule [07-007r2:212:4-5]
>>if a co-array is defined on an image in a segment in a segment, it shall
>>not be referenced, defined, or become undefined in a segment on another
>>image unless the segments are ordered.

The code is fine according to this rule.  The co-array X defined on 
image I is not defined, referenced, or undefined by any statement 
executed on any other image.

The second SYNC ALL statement is not needed since END is an image 
control statement and contains an implicit global synchronization.


Bill Long                                   longb at cray.com
Fortran Technical Support    &              voice: 651-605-9024
Bioinformatics Software Development         fax:   651-605-9142
Cray Inc., 1340 Mendota Heights Rd., Mendota Heights, MN, 55120


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20070620/060ae4fa/attachment.html 

More information about the J3 mailing list