(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4526) WG5 ballot on interpretations

[Micki St. James]

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 21, 2011, at 2:21 AM, Robert Corbett <robert.corbett at oracle.com> wrote:

> Yes  No Number     Title
> --- -N- F03/0030   IEEE divide by zero
> -Y- --- F03/0048   Control edit descriptors in UDDTIO
> -Y- --- F03/0085   Finalizing targets of pointer or allocatable
> -Y- --- F03/0091   Array components cannot depend on length type parameters
> --- -N- F03/0096   Can a read statement change the unit value?
> -Y- --- F03/0105   SIZE= specifier and UDDTIO
> --- -N- F03/0110   Restoring dropped restriction on ENTRY
> -C- --- F03/0121   Precise FP semantics of the REAL intrinsic
> -Y- --- F03/0123   Implicit typing in derived types
> -Y- --- F03/0124   definition is poorly defined
> -Y- --- F03/0128   Subobjects in namelist output
> -Y- --- F08/0001   Generic resolution with pointer dummy arguments
> -Y- --- F08/0002   Are assumed- or deferred-shape objects allowed in namelist?
> -Y- --- F08/0003   Is a disassociated pointer allowed as an actual DIM
>                  argument?
> -Y- --- F08/0004   Is TARGET argument of ASSOCIATED a pointer or nonpointer
>                  dummy?
>       F08/0005*  optional arguments and ASSOCIATED - subsumed by F08/0004
> -Y- --- F08/0006   generic resolution with banned argument combinations
> -Y- --- F08/0007   Can zero have more than one bit sequence representation?
> --- -N- F08/0008   IEEE exceptions for intrinsic functions
> -Y- --- F08/0009   Is ABS ever required to be the optional IEC 60559 abs?
> -Y- --- F08/0010   deallocating objects that are associated with other objects
> -Y- --- F08/0011   How many times are constructed values finalized?
>       F08/0012*  Are constants finalized? - subsumed by F08/0011
> -Y- --- F08/0013   How does finalization interact with allocatable assignment?
> -Y- --- F08/0014   Finalizing assignment to vector-subscripted object
> -Y- --- F08/0015   IMPLICIT
> -Y- --- F08/0016   Can a vector-subscripted argument become undefined?
> -Y- --- F08/0017   Elemental subroutine restrictions
> -Y- --- F08/0018   Impure elemental restrictions
> -Y- --- F08/0019   Transformational Bessel functions
> -Y- --- F08/0020   FINDLOC and logical arguments
> 
> -----------------------------------------------
> 
> F03/0030
> The proposed interpretation and edits make no sense unless
> one assumes that the intent is to redefine and repurpose
> the function IEEE_SUPPORT_DATATYPE.  If that is the intent,
> the interpretation and edits should address the issue
> directly instead of modifying seemingly unrelated text.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------
> 
> F03/0096
> The second proposed edit prohibits the value of a SIZE=
> specifier from depending "on any <input-item>."  That
> seems to require the value of a SIZE= specifier to be
> constant.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> F03/0110
> The last sentence of the proposed interpretation
> contradicts the conformance clause of the standard.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> F03/0121
> Fortran programmers need the functionality proposed
> in the request for interpretation.  The mechanism
> proposed corresponds to what many Fortran programmers
> already assume to be the case.  The committee should
> either adopt the proposed mechanism or provide an
> alternative mechanism.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> F08/0008
> If the statement in the standard that "the flag
> IEEE_INVALID shall signal" is, as is stated in the
> interpretation, is incorrect, the text of the
> standard should be altered to reflect that.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> Robert Corbett
> representing Oracle America
> 
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at j3-fortran.org
> http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3