(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4421) WG informal ballot

[Jim Xia]

Addition comments from IBM (C side people)


3.3.{3,4} Seems to indicate runtime or generated code should do 
deallocation. Note that in C if no stdlib is included and no C lib is 
linked, this force programs to link in a library that they didn't want.

5.2.2: base_addr: Says if the object has zero size the value is not NULL. 
However the C standard allows NULL return values from malloc(0).

5.2.2, 5.2.3: Was there a reason to allow any order for the middle 
elements? This seems to decrease portability between compilers.

5.2.4 p3 seems to conflict with 5.2.5.5 p7, should the 15 there not be the 
macro value?

5.2.5.5 p3 indicates that it can establish a C descriptor for an object or 
a subobject of it implying that even if the user wanted a descriptor for 
an object they could end up getting a descriptor for a subobject.

6.3 p3 Grammar error: "that are *of* assumed type".


I think the first comment is serious enough to reconsider the requirement 
on INTENT(OUT) for allocatables.


Thanks,

Jim Xia

Compiler Testing, X10 & XLF
IBM Toronto Lab at 8200 Warden Ave,
Markham, On, L6G 1C7
905-413-3444
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20110330/59aa9de0/attachment.html>