(j3.2006) F2008: Bogus text in UDIO; IMAGE_INDEX question

[Bill Long]

On 3/30/11 9:06 AM, Whitlock, Stan wrote:
> John,
>
> I'm inclined to say, yes, let's add an optional KIND= to NUM_IMAGES just for completeness.  And I think we should add it now as we finish the TR.
>

Since the value returned on one image for this_image() is the same as 
the value of num_images(), this_image() should have a consistent change.

As a practical concern, this issue is years away from relevance. I don't 
think it needs to be addressed in the Coarray TR.  The next revision in 
2013/4/5? would be more than soon enough.

Cheers,
Bill

> Thanks			/Stan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: j3-bounces at j3-fortran.org [mailto:j3-bounces at j3-fortran.org] On Behalf Of John Reid
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 7:29 AM
> To: fortran standards email list for J3
> Subject: Re: (j3.2006) F2008: Bogus text in UDIO; IMAGE_INDEX question
>
> Micki St. James wrote:
>   >  Which leaves only Tobias' last question, to which the answer is apparently
> "No, it returns 0 in the case that NUM_IMAGES() is less than 213."
>   >
>   >  What happens if 213 (but not 3, 1, or 2) is bigger than HUGE(0) ?
>
> Hum - both num_images and image_index return default integers. We thought that
> we did not need to allow for the number of images exceeding 2**31. Will a future
> revision need to add an optional kind parameter, just as we did for size, etc in
> Fortran 2003?
>
> John.
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at j3-fortran.org
> http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3
>
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at j3-fortran.org
> http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

-- 
Bill Long                                           longb at cray.com
Fortran Technical Support    &                 voice: 651-605-9024
Bioinformatics Software Development            fax:   651-605-9142
Cray Inc./Cray Plaza, Suite 210/380 Jackson St./St. Paul, MN 55101