(j3.2006) question about generic resolution

[Aleksandar Donev]

Van Snyder wrote:
> It seems to me that we can add "nonallocatable" before "target" in
> 12.5.2.7p2 and make the reference unambiguous.
This is not a good way to resolve this, IMO. Don't throw the baby out 
with the bath water---allocatable targets are just fine so long as 
generics are not involved. We should focus on fixing the generic 
resolution conflict, not removing, crippling, or otherwise lessening 
(either one of) the features.
Best,
Aleks