(j3.2006) Typographical / editorial comments on 08-297r1
Fri Dec 5 11:14:30 EST 2008
Van Snyder wrote:
> I noticed a few tiny editorial things about 08-297r1 about which I would
> like to quibble.
> In 13.7.11b, VALUE description, insert "the" between "have" and "same".
> In 13.7.11b, Example, exchange the arguments. This is actually a
> technical error, not an editorial preference.
> In 126.96.36.199a,b, delete "specified by atomic subroutines".
This wording was intentional. The term "atomic subroutine" is what we
define in the standard. "Atomic operations" is not mentioned
elsewhere, so this sentence is the only effective definition. It would
be possible to add a sentence to the paragraph in 13.1 where atomic
subroutines are described to say that the actions are "atomic
operations". However, I think the current text is less likely to be
misinterpreted. With your proposed change, the sentence would read "...
for which the processor supports atomic operations.". It reads as if
it is up to the processor to decide which atomic operations are
supported, rather than the language spec.
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at j3-fortran.org
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
More information about the J3