(j3.2006) Conceptual Gap with BLOCK Construct, Scope, and Host Association?

[Van Snyder]

On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 11:37 -0700, Reinhold.Bader at lrz.de wrote:
>  as far as I remember, there were indeed problems with the BLOCK
> construct in drafts up to beginning of this year. Then, BLOCK was made
> a scoping unit, and the concept of "inclusive scope" was introduced to
> assure that the block construct has access to entities declared
> outside it.

"inclusive scope" was not introduced to allow BLOCK constructs to have
access to entities declared outside of them.  Host association works
fine for that.  It was introduced to make labels of FORMAT statements
within BLOCK constructs accessible outside of the scoping unit of the
block (and maybe for additional reasons I don't remember).  Statement
labels have "inclusive scope."