(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4629) Vote on N1904

[John Reid]

Please answer the following question "Is N1904 ready for forwarding to SC22
as the DTS?" in one of these ways.

3) No, for the following reasons.

Page 9, C407a. After "that" add "does not have INTENT(OUT) and".
Reason: INTENT(OUT) causes the dummy argument to become undefined, so
is a sort of assignment. Allowing it is inconsistent with C407b - the
intention is that as assumed-type object be altered only by a C
function.

Page 10, C1255, line 2, change "or" to
", a variable that has the ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute, a variable
of assumed shape, a variable of assumed type, a variable of assumed
character length, or".
Reason: We are currently saying that all these variables are disallowed
as arguments of a procedure with the BIND attribute. This is at variance
with the whole intent of the TS. This change perhaps goes too far. It
allows a procedure to have the BIND attribute despite it being
impossible to write a C function prototype with which it interoperates.
If this is felt to be important, more constraints along the lines of
C516 could be added.

Page 17, 8.2, line 3 and page 20, end of para under Table 8.1. Change
"scalar or is an assumed-shape, explicit-shape, or assumed-size array"
to
"scalar, an array whose shape is known, or an assumed-size array"
or
"an object whose shape is known or an assumed-size array."
Reason: The present wording excludes the case of an actual argument
of assumed rank. It is also misleading since there is nothing in the
descriptor to distinguish an assumed-shape array from an explicit-shape
array (and no need for it).

In addition, I suggest this change:

Page 15, RANK. In the Example para, change "effective" to "actual".
Reason: The meaning is the same in this case, but the reader has to
think it through with "effective".