(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4825) [ukfortran] J3/12-nnn J3 interpretations letter ballot #26 after meeting 198 - due 12-Oct-2012
Tue Oct 9 22:52:06 EDT 2012
On Wed, 2012-10-10 at 11:25 +0900, Malcolm Cohen wrote:
> NO vote for F08/0075:
> The correct fix for this interp is to acknowledge our mistake in
> permitting this syntax to occur at all anywhere, and changing R602 and
> C602 to
> R602 variable is designator or function-reference
> C602 (R602) function-reference shall have a data pointer result.
This was the alternative answer in 12-149r0:
It was an oversight that this ambiguous program conforms to the syntax
and constraints in two different ways. Since the standard does not
establish an unique interpretation, it is not a conforming program.
That this program is ambiguous was caused by an oversight to allow a
<variable> to consist of <expr>, in which <expr> is a reference, as a
defined operation, to a function that has a data pointer result.
The alternative edits are those Malcolm proposes.
> NO vote for F08/0076:
> This should also be fixed by removing this particular syntax
> (operators) for the feature (pointer function reference as variable).
> Or at the very least, removing it from the READ statement.
I don't object to J3 taking up these interps again.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the J3