(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4383) [ukfortran] WG5 informal ballot re Interop. TR

[Aleksandar Donev]

On 12/06/10 15:08, Bill Long wrote:
> I do not see anything that prohibits this.
Yes, it seems that way, but not clear if by design or accident. In 
particular, there is a prohibition against the type of x being "exotic" 
(e.g., having type parameters). The dynamic type may, at the point of 
the call. Presumably this could be checked at runtime during debugging 
runs. But in general it won't be checked, so the type info in the 
descriptor will again be less-than-useful.

> However, if the dummy were allocatable or pointer, then for the sub(x) 
> call,  both the dummy and actual need to be "unlimited polymorphic". 
> This is nominally the case if TYPE(*) is unlimited polymorphic, but I 
> see this as one of those cases where the base standard might need 
> modification to require CLASS(*) instead of "unlimited polymorphic". 
Yes, good point, that needs some thought too.

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