(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3591) Assumed-type and Assumed-rank extensions for C Interop TR.
Fri Jul 25 21:22:59 EDT 2008
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 14:55 -0500, Bill Long wrote:
> Van Snyder wrote:
> > RANK() was proposed for Fortran 90 in about 1986. I argued against it,
> > back when I didn't appreciate the difference between specification and
> > initialization expressions, and it disappearred. I don't know whether
> > it was my arguments that made the difference, or others objected as
> > well, and more eloquently and effectively than I did.
> I imagine that RANK() might have been rejected for f90 because the rank
> of an object was blatantly obvious from its declaration as an array (or
> scalar). The assumed-rank concept is new here, and fails to come under
> that argument. Whether a new intrinsic is needed now seems like a valid
> discussion point. I left it out on the minimal changes principle,
> rather than because I thought it was defective.
To interface to HDF, I need a rank-1 array of the same extent as the
rank of another one. I use size(lbound(X)). I'd like to make this the
value of a parameter, but at least one processor insists I can't do this
because X is of assumed shape (the lower bound isn't specified, so it's
1). So I make it the dimension of a variable S, then get its value
As Malcolm says, this might more properly fall into the category of
"processor has bugs" than "vendors disagree."
More information about the J3