(j3.2006) Is this or is this not F95-standard conformant?

[Malcolm Cohen]

Van Snyder wrote:
> Is line 19 of the little attached program F95-standard conformant?

Obviously not.

> It looks like items (7)(d) and (7)(second b) at [97-007r2:94:17,21]
> allow it, since the property inquired about is the kind type parameter
> value.  In 10-007 the equivalent is 7.1.12p1(4)(b) at [151:29].

"An initialization expression is a constant expression in which ... and where 
each subscript ... is an initialization expression."

The subscript "I" in the expression is not itself an initialization expression 
so it violates this requirement.

The presence of intrinsic functions such as LEN and SIZE in the list of 
permitted inquiries makes it easy to see why this requirement exists.

BTW, detection of the violation of the requirement is mandatory in the context 
of the constraint for rule R730.

Similar text and constraints exist in F2010.

Cheers,
-- 
................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.