(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4544) Comments on the technical content of the coarray TS

[David Muxworthy]

On 28 Sep 2011, at 11:37, John Reid wrote:

> Would anyone else like to comment? I will be talking about this at the
> BCS Fortran Group AGM tomorrow and hope to solicit some comments to
> add.


and on 28 Sep 2011, at 12:10, N.M. Maclaren wrote:

> I have rechecked the WG5 Garching minutes and, while we did not
> formally agree to Reinhold's point (2), I recall there being a
> consensus that it was a necessary step within J3.


As author of the minutes and resolutions, I have to admit that they
are pretty minimal.  However my recollection of the discussion at the
WG5 meeting was that N1858 was to be shredded, annihilated, trashed,
100% forgotten about and that we would start again from scratch by
first asking anew for user requirements, then producing an Objectives
and Rationale document and only thirdly specifying syntax and
semantics.  I was surprised then at the BCS Fortran Group AGM when the
discussion seemed to imply that the coarray TS would essentially be
N1858 with variations.

Perhaps others at the meeting could confirm or contradict my
impression.
David