(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4801) [ukfortran] Fourth WG5 ballot on interpretations

[Malcolm Cohen]

The following Fortran 2008 interpretations are being balloted:

Yes  No Number     Title

-Y-  ---  F08/0043   Executing a type-bound procedure on a coindexed
                      object
-N-  ---  F08/0048   Sequence association for coarrays
-Y-  ---  F08/0054   Requirements for needing an explicit interface
-C-  ---  F08/0055   G editing for reals
-Y-  ---  F08/0056   Non-polymorphic ALLOCATE with polymorphic SOURCE=
-Y-  ---  F08/0057   Interoperability with empty types
-Y-  ---  F08/0058   ENTRY point RESULT variable
-Y-  ---  F08/0059   Auto-targetting requirements
-Y-  ---  F08/0060   Procedure pointer assignment with an EXTERNAL target
-Y-  ---  F08/0061   Description of the CONTIGUOUS attribute misworded?
-Y-  ---  F08/0062   Mixing default initialization with DATA
                      initialization
-Y-  ---  F08/0063   G editing to a narrow output field
-Y-  ---  F08/0064   STATUS of GET_ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE
-Y-  ---  F08/0065   Should certain procedures in intrinsic modules be
                      pure?
-Y-  ---  F08/0066   Are certain expressions with pointer initialization
                      constant?
-Y-  ---  F08/0067   Passing arrays of extended type objects
-Y-  ---  F08/0068   Pointer association and extended type arrays
-Y-  ---  F08/0069   Which part of an effective argument becomes
                      undefined?
-Y-  ---  F08/0070   Finalization of INTENT(OUT) arguments
-Y-  ---  F08/0072   Final subroutines with corank
-C-  ---  F08/0073   Polymorphic auto-targetting


NO vote for F08/0048

Bill Long writes:
  "Does the interp open the door to a whole room full of "clever
   programming" opportunities? For example, you can pass a different
   element on each image."
Yes, that is precisely why I voted against this interp at every previous 
opportunity.  I think it is a bad idea to provide such a confusing feature with 
so few redeeming qualities.

(I do not expect to be on the winning side in this vote.)

COMMENT for F08/0055.

In the edits, change "with d==0" to "with d equal to 0", twice.

COMMENT for F08/0073.

The note about the edit being unnecessary if F08/0059 passes should be an 
instruction not to make the edit in that case.

Cheers,
-- 
................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.