(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3685) [ukfortran] N1755: Request for new features from MPI Forum

[N.M. Maclaren]

On Nov 14 2008, Robert Corbett wrote:
>> 
>> As I said (and you admitted), the situation is no worse than 
>> INTENT(IN).  It's not at all like C const as you must know.
>
>I'm sorry, but I don't know that.  It seems comparable to me.

I have to fly :-) so can't check the wording, but INTENT(IN) is not
the same at all.  A C program will remain conforming if a const argument
is passed as a second argument that is changed.  And there are several
weys to 'deconst' pointers, and remain conforming.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England.
Email:  nmm1 at cam.ac.uk
Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679