(j3.2006) Finalization ordering question
Thu Oct 11 22:24:01 EDT 2007
> Suppose you have a base type, t, with a finalizable component, ft. And
> a type, e, that extends type t and has a finalizable component fe. If
> you have an array type(e) :: x(3) and it is finalized, the recipe in
> 220.127.116.11 seems to say the finalizations has to be done in this order:
> Step 2: x(1)%fe, x(2)%fe, x(3)%fe
> Step 3: x(1)%ft, x(2)%ft, x(3)%ft
That's how the standard defines the sequence of finalizations of an array
of objects of extended type. I wouldn't think of "efficiency" as an issue
when finalizations are involved. They appear in too many places (very
often unnecessarily) and almost certain to produce inefficient code.
XL Fortran Compiler Testing
IBM Toronto Lab at 8200 Warden Ave.
Phone (905) 413-3444 Tie-line 969-3444
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the J3