(j3.2006) Materials for 199

[Van Snyder]

On Tue, 2012-09-18 at 12:30 +0900, Malcolm Cohen wrote:
> 
> >... describe yet another scheme to cope with the
> >problem of integrating kind type parameters with type bound procedures
> >at meeting 199,
> 
> They are already integrated.  Given the popularity of PDTs with vendors and 
> users, we should not be thinking of doing anything more with them at this stage 
> in my opinion.

They are not integrated.  One can declare an object of a type using kind
type parameters that are not supported by its type-bound procedures.
There is no standard-conforming portable way around this.

> Unless this is "another 
> scheme" that is really**7 simple, we should not be thinking about it.  We can 
> start  thinking about "wart identification and removal".

The scheme I'd like to propose is simpler than parameterized modules or
macros.  The problem between kind type parameters and type-bound
procedures isn't a wart.  Is it OK to excise tumors in the next
revision, or are we only allowed to identify warts and pop pimples?