(j3.2006) Public Comment J32029

[Michael Ingrassia]

                                                           08-243
To: J3
From: Michael Ingrassia
Subject: Public Comment J32029
Date: 2008 July 08
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Commenter's Subject was "Fix error in type equivalence"

Paragraph 2 of Section 4.5.1.3 states

     Data entities in different scoping units also
     have the same type if they are declared with
     reference to different derived-type definitions
     that specify the same type name, ...

Why should it matter that that the data entities
are in different scoping units?  Shouldn't the
same rules apply if the data entities are in the
same scoping unit?  The answer to the first
question is that it should not matter, and the
answer to the second is that the same rules
should apply.

Examination of the first paragraph of Section
4.5.3.1 reveals what likely happened.  That
paragraph states

     Derived-type definitions with the same name
     may appear in different scoping units, in
     which case they may be independent and
     describe different derived types or they may
     describe the same type.

Obviously, the phrase "in different scoping units"
in the quotation from paragraph 2 was misapplied
to the data entity.  It should have been applied to
the derived-types definitions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------