(j3.2006) does move_alloc violate restrictions in 188.8.131.52?
Thu Oct 29 22:59:04 EDT 2009
Is this subroutine standard conforming?
subroutine Move_Alloc ( A, B )
real, intent(inout), allocatable :: A
real, intent(out), allocatable :: B
allocate ( b )
b = a
deallocate ( a )
end subroutine Move_Alloc
Now, how about if I call it
call move_alloc ( x, x )
The call is a problem, not the subroutine.
There's no problem with the standard's description of the intrinsic
Jim Xia wrote:
> > While I agree that intrinsics can be special, I would expect the
> > standard to call out the cases where they are. As I explained in my
> > previous response (copied below), I think MOVE_ALLOC is
> > subject to the usual rules.
> Thanks Bob for your reply. That is not what I have in mind
> unfortunately. I'm a bit of tired on the discussions on this very
> topic, and have many other issues to work with. But I'll not be
> surprised to see the same question re-surface in a few years time when
> more implementations available. Someone might ask the same question
> if the following code is standard conforming
> subroutine foo (a, b)
> call move_alloc(a,b)
> end subroutine
> As of right now, I doubt it is. But let's put it aside as I don't
> feel the email correspondence is really productive.
> Jim Xia
> XL 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
More information about the J3