(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3688) Ballot on the technical content of the TR
Sat Dec 6 18:08:07 EST 2008
My vote is "Yes with comments."
A C descriptor has a flag that indicates whether a pointer is or is not
associated. It's not always possible to tell. It is always possible to
tell whether a pointer is or is not disassociated.
Whenever "type" is used it should be clear whether it's C type or
Fortran type. It's not explicit, and therefore not clear, in a few places.
The "sm" component of a CFI_dim_t struct is specified to be measured in
bytes. This should be in processor-dependent units.
In the fourth paragraph of the "Assumed-shape, ..." section, shouldn't
it be possible to deallocate a pointer object?
John Reid wrote:
> ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5 N1763
> WG5 letter ballot 5 on technical content of N1761
> John Reid, 26 November 2008
> This is the letter ballot that WG5 agreed to hold in view of there being
> insufficient time in Tokyo to discuss the technical content of the TR on
> "Further Interoperability of Fortran with C".
> Please answer the following question "Do you approve of the technical
> content of N1761?" in one or more of these ways (it is acceptable to choose
> both 2 and 3).
> 1) Yes.
> 2) Yes, with comments.
> 3) Yes, except with OPTIONAL dummy arguments in interoperable interfaces
> removed, with comments.
> 4) No, with comments (comments required).
> 5) Abstain.
> Please send your vote to sc22wg5 at open-std.org to arrive by 9 a.m. (UK time)
> on January 5th 2009 (my first working day of the New Year).
> Note that the contents of N1763 are identical with those of 08-305 except
> that line 122 of 08-305 is changed from
> "the argument of the C_LOC intrinsic function in the ISO_C_BINDING"
> "the argument of the C_LOC function in the ISO_C_BINDING intrinsic"
More information about the J3