(j3.2006) co-array variable
Wed May 30 21:21:32 EDT 2007
On Friday 25 May 2007 15:04, Bill Long wrote:
> The original intent of [197:13-15] (the result of considerable discussion
> and compromise) was to not allow array elements or structure components in
> this context.
After some discussion with Bill (I think) we've concluded that there was no
such intent---the point of scalar is to restrict to atomic references and
array elements and structure components seem not that different from scalar
co-arrays (but maybe someone can again explain to me why array elements are
not allowed as DO indices?).
LOGICAL, VOLATILE :: LOCKS(10)[*]
The intent is that
may be unordered with respect to the definition of LOCKS by other images.
However, the references:
must precede or follow the corresponding definitions by other images. The
first one has a co-indexed reference and the second references a co-array of
Similarly, I believe
should require segment ordering, but
This is all weird, but such is VOLATILE. Allowing non-atomic unordered
references to VOLATILEs would lead to even more weirdness if not plainly
Granted, one can say ALL(volatile_array) already in Fortran 2003 and different
elements of volatile_array may change at different times (externally) and
lead to weirdness, but then this is outside the standard. Since co-arrays are
built-in they should have well-defined semantics even in the presence of
Aleksandar Donev, Ph.D.
Lawrence Postdoctoral Fellow @ LLNL
High Performance Computational Materials Science and Chemistry
E-mail: donev1 at llnl.gov
Phone: (925) 424-6816 Fax: (925) 423-0785
Address: P.O.Box 808, L-367, Livermore, CA 94551-9900
More information about the J3