(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3558) [ukfortran] Letter ballot 5 on F2003 interpretations

[Jim Xia]

Then what about another quote from standard for 10.6.1.2.1. F editing: 
"When w is zero, the processor selects the field width." [228:10].  I 
think this sentence overrides what Malcolm just quoted since this sentence 
particularly describe the F editing, while the other is general 
description for I, B, O, Z and F editing.

Cheers

Jim Xia

RL Fortran Compiler Test
IBM Toronto Lab at 8200 Warden Ave, Markham, On, L6G 1C7
Phone (905) 413-3444  Tie-line 313-3444
email: jimxia at ca.ibm.com
D2/YF7/8200 /MKM



John Reid <j.k.reid at rl.ac.uk> 
Sent by: j3-bounces at j3-fortran.org
03/26/2008 10:06 AM
Please respond to
j.k.reid at rl.ac.uk; Please respond to
fortran standards email list for J3 <j3 at j3-fortran.org>


To
WG5 <sc22wg5 at open-std.org>
cc

Subject
(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3558) [ukfortran] Letter ballot 5 on F2003 
interpretations







------- Forwarded message -------

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 03:29:53 +0900, Jim Xia <jimxia at ca.ibm.com> wrote:
> NO vote on F03/0100
> The second edit says that if <w> is zero, then the output field for NaN
> values is 'NaN'.  This seems to be too restrictive.  Processors should 
be
> given options for additional information in the output, e.g. a processor
> can
> provide additional information to specify whether a NaN is quiet NaN or
> signaling NaN.

Malcolm says: This argument is without merit.

w==0 is "minimal field width", and explicitly prohibits inclusion of
optional information (such as optional plus signs and leading zeroes).

If w==3 produces "NaN" and not "***", then w==0 producing anything
longer than 3 is, by definition, NOT minimal.

I quote from the standard

   "On output, with ... F editing, the specified value of the field
    width <w> may be zero.  In such case, the processor selects
    the smallest positive actual field width that does not result in
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    a field filled with asterisks."
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Jim's suggestion is contradicted both by the letter and the
spirit of the minimal width editing feature in the standard.

Cheers,
-- 
................Malcolm Cohen (malcolm at nag-j.co.jp)

_______________________________________________
J3 mailing list
J3 at j3-fortran.org
http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20080326/53f967c9/attachment.html