(j3.2006) a question on c_f_pointer call

[Aleksandar Donev]

On 08/25/10 17:20, Bill Long wrote:
> Would a restriction like this work: "A pointer cannot be deallocated 
> if its association was established by C_F_POINTER" ?
Before we go down that route, let's ask whether the problem is not that 
we require error reporting that is too much of an imposition on 
implementations? That is, if the compiler is not required to set the 
stat correctly, is there a problem? We had a long argument about the 
words that are there for Fortran pointers. The original words said 
something like "whole of a target", and then we changed to what is there 
now via an interp. The intention of the present words, it seems to me, 
is that as long as you have a pointer that points to a whole block of 
memory that was allocated via ALLOCATE, you can deallocate. It does not 
matter how the pointer itself got the information. Malcolm wrote the 
majority of the interp answers, and maybe he can give a reasoning and an 
answer that is consistent with how we answered that interp.
Aleks

-- 
Aleksandar Donev, Assistant Professor of Mathematics
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
Office: 909 Warren Weaver Hall, New York University
E-mail: donev at courant.nyu.edu
Phone: (212) 992-7315; Fax: (212) 995-4121
Mailing address: 251 Mercer St, New York, NY 10012
Web: http://cims.nyu.edu/~donev