(j3.2006) FW: 11-229 J3 Fortran interp letter ballot #24 - due 19-Aug-2011 - 2nd try

[Malcolm Cohen]

Bill Long wrote:
>Good point, though the same name requirement seems a bit artificial in the 
>alternative program since the names of types defined in a subprogram are local 
>the the subprogram.

However those are the rules and have been since the creation of derived types.

>  However, if you change the declarations in the original example to T1 and T2 
> (different names), then the types of X and Y already run afoul of this rule, 
> so the point of the example seems to get lost.  Either way, the example looks 
> broken.

Not so, the requirement is for the name in the type definition to be the same. 
Renaming on the USE statement does not affect the name it had in the type 
definition.

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