(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5055) WG5 minutes

[John Reid]

John Reid wrote:
 > WG5,
 >
 > We decided at Delft to approve the minutes electronically. Here is the
 > latest draft. Please let me know by 29 July whether you approve these
 > minutes or wish to suggest corrections.

Comments have come only from Bill and David has incorporated them. Here 
is the approved set of minutes.

Thanks, David, for all your work on this.

John.
-------------- next part --------------
                                         ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5 N1977

                Minutes of Meeting of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5
            Hosted by NEN, the Netherlands Member Body for JTC1/SC22
              NEN, Vlinderweg 6, 2623 AX Delft, The Netherlands 
                            June 24 - 28, 2013

List of Participants:
John Reid (JKR Associates, UK) convenor
Dan Nagle (NCAR, USA) PL22.3 chair

Reinhold Bader (Leibniz Supercomputing Centre, Germany) (Monday to Thursday)
Mark Batty (University of Cambridge, UK) (Monday to Wednesday)
Daniel Chen (IBM, Canada)
Malcolm Cohen (NAG, UK)
Steve Lionel (Intel, USA)
Bill Long (Cray, USA)
Nick Maclaren (University of Cambridge, UK)
Toon Moene (Gnu Fortran, Netherlands)
David Muxworthy (BSI, UK)
Van Snyder (Caltech/JPL, USA)
Masayuki Takata (Edogawa University, Japan)

WG5 papers are referenced as Nnnnn. They are available from
                 ftp://ftp.nag.co.uk/sc22wg5/
PL22.3 papers are referenced as 13-nnn. They are available from
                 http://www.j3-fortran.org/

1. Opening of the Meeting
The meeting opened at 09:00 on Monday 24 June 2013.

2. Opening business
2.1 Introductory remarks from the Convenor
The convenor said that the principal objectives of the meeting were:
firstly to develop the draft TS on further coarray facilities;
secondly to consider the defect reports in document 13-006A; thirdly
to construct an initial list of deficiencies and discrepancies in
Fortran 2008 to be addressed in the next revision.

2.2 Welcome from the Host
Toon Moene, on behalf of NEN, welcomed participants to Delft.

2.3 Local arrangements
The host described local arrangements and said that there would be a
dinner for participants on the Wednesday evening.

2.4 Appointments for this meeting
The drafting committee would be Reinhold Bader, Daniel Chen, Toon
Moene, David Muxworthy (chair), Van Snyder and Masayuki Takata.  David
Muxworthy would act as secretary and John Reid as librarian.

2.5 Adoption of the agenda (N1964)
The preliminary agenda was adopted, with the addition of three
tutorials (see below).

2.6 Approval of the minutes of the Markham 2012 Meeting (N1926)
The minutes of the 2012 meeting were approved.  It was agreed that in
future minutes would be circulated for approval by WG5 letter ballot
approximately one month after each meeting.

3. Matters arising from the minutes
The convenor reported that it was no longer proposed that the CD stage
be omitted from standards development; in future the CD stage would be
optional, as determined by the Working Group.

4. Status of Markham 2012 Resolutions (N1927)
There was nothing to report.

5. Reports
5.1 SC22 Matters (Convener)
A report of the 2012 SC22 meeting was in document N1940.  The meeting
had, as an experiment, allowed remote participation.  There was then a
short discussion as to whether remote participation would be suitable
for WG5 meetings.  Opinion generally was not in favour.  It was
reported that the three-year, or three-edition, limit on corrigenda
(v. ISO/IEC Directives Part1, 2.10.4) would not to be enforced.

5.2 National Activity Reports (Heads of Delegations)
Canada:   The Canadian programming language committee had
          representatives for Ada, C, C++, Cobol and Fortran.  It met
          at IBM.
Germany:  A set of requirements for the next revision was being
          developed but was not yet complete.  Tobias Burnus had
          implemented a large part of the interoperability TS for
          gfortran.
Japan:    Translation of Fortran 2008 was proceeding slowly due to lack
          of resources.  It would take at least another two years.
Netherlands: The Dutch programming language committee, NC381022, had
          representatives for C, C++, Cobol and Fortran and met twice
          a year.
UK:       Report is in N1976.
US:       Report is in N1974.

5.3 Report from Primary Development Body (NCITS/J3 Chair)
Report is in N1974.

5.4 Reports from other Development Bodies (Editors/Heads)
TS on further coarray facilities: Bill Long
This was dealt with under item 6 below.

5.5 Liaison Reports:
NCITS/PL22.11 (C): Dan Nagle
     There was nothing of note to report.
MPI: Bill Long
     Developments in the MPI 3 Fortran interface looked encouraging
     although there was a lack of knowledge of Fortran.
UPC: Bill Long (for Damian Rouson)
     UPC 1.3 draft consisted of the language, a required library and
     an optional library. Some UPC customers were unhappy with the state
     of UPC. Some had come to Cray asking for new features.   There was
     now a Cray C++ coarray compiler with the Fortran semantics and
     analogous syntax reproduced in C++ using a class library.  No change
     to the actual C++ compiler was involved.
IFIP/WG2.5: Van Snyder
     No news was available.
OpenMP: Bill Long
     The OpenMP Board were incorporating the capabilities of OpenACC and
     had almost completed the work.
WG23 (Vulnerabilities): Dan Nagle
     The current draft of the third edition of the Vulnerabilities TS,
     WG23/n0453, included a Fortran annex.  A couple of mistakes had
     been found in the annex.  WG23 were continuing to add new
     vulnerabilities.  WG21 were not interested in contributing an
     annex for C++.

[PL22.3 plenary and subgroup sessions from 10:05 to 16:30]

>From this point agenda items 6-9 largely proceeded in parallel.

6. Construct the PDTS on Further Coarray Features. 
7. Consider the Fortran defect reports (interpretations) in J3-006. 
8. Construct an initial list of deficiencies and discrepancies in 
   Fortran 2008 to be addressed in the next revision.  
9. Consider a proposal from USA concerning a system of units of 
   measurement in Fortran.

The subgroup developing the further coarray TS reported on progress.
The subgroup examining proposals for the revision of Fortran 2008
which were in documents 13-244r1 and N1975 reported on their
preliminary conclusions (described in more detail below).  For ease of
reference proposals from 13-244r1 are written as US-nn and those from
N1975 as UK-nn.

The meeting adjourned at 17:00.
...........................................................................
Tuesday

Paper 13-271 containing edits to N1967 was approved unanimously; paper
13-272 was withdrawn after some discussion; paper 13-273 was withdrawn
after a straw vote 6-1-5 in favour of removing EVENT_TYPE (and keeping
LOCAL_EVENT_TYPE renamed as EVENT_TYPE).

For the revision of Fortran 2008, a block vote was proposed on the
adoption of items US-01, US-03, US-04, US-05, US-08, US-12, US-14,
UK-02, UK-03, UK-05, UK-06 and UK-08.  Following objections, items
US-01, US-14 and UK-08 were withdrawn from the vote.  The remaining
set was approved by 11-1-0.

After further consideration US-01 (extending the G0 edit descriptor)
was approved by 11-0-1, US-14 (updating with respect to IEC
60559:2011) by 12-0-0 and UK-08 (new reduction intrinsic) by 10-0-2.

The subgroup had recommended approval of all of UK-10 (new
obsolesences and deletions) other than subitem 2c (obsolescing
implicit interfaces).  There were objections to subitems 1a, 1b, 2f
and 3.  After further discussion parts were voted on separately: the
set 2a, 2b, 2d and 2e was approved by 11-0-1, 1a and 1b (new
deletions) by 10-1-1 and 2f (obsolescing the FORALL construct) by
11-0-1.  A decision on subitem 3 (unobsolescing the CHARACTER* form)
was postponed.

[PL22.3 subgroup sessions from 10:30 to 13:40]

Mark Batty gave a presentation entitled "Relaxed Memory: The
Specification Design Space".  He described and contrasted two main
models of memory specification; this was followed by discussion.
The slides are in document N1985.

[PL22.3 subgroup sessions and plenary from 15:30 to 16:45]

Subitem 3 of UK-10 was reconsidered.  The vote was 5-5-2; this was
deemed to be disapproval.

The meeting adjourned at 17:00.
...........................................................................
Wednesday

After some short PL22.3 business, consideration returned to revision
of Fortran 2008.  Subgroup recommended that at most one of US-13
(Conditional expressions and arguments) and UK-01 (Default KINDs for
constants and intrinsics) be adopted.  Although many users would find
UK-01 useful with modern hardware there was concern that decoupling
the concept of 'default kind' from 'single precision' could cause
difficulties with separate compilation and with links to libraries,
and further that UK-01 was on the margins of what was allowed by
Markham resolution M6.  Nevertheless a vote on which of the two was
preferred gave: US-13 4, UK-01 7, equal preference 1.  A vote on
whether it should be actively pursued gave: yes 2, wait 7,
indifferent 3.

To clarify the situation with these two papers there was a vote to
confirm that the following would not taken up this year, subject to
possible review by WG5 in 2014: US-02, US-06, US-07, US-09, US-10,
US-11, US-13, US-15, US-16, US-17, UK-01, UK-07 and subitems 2c and 3
of UK-10.  This was approved nem con.  UK-09 had addressed the same point
as US-14 and was discounted.  At this point all items other than UK-04
had been decided upon.

Papers 13-265r1 and 13-272r1 which detailed updates to N1967 were both
approved by unanimous consent.  Papers 13-275 and 13-276 were both
withdrawn for revision.

Van Snyder gave a presentation "Units of Measure in Fortran" which
proposed a new TS which would add the ability to check physical
dimensions and measurements in Fortran.  The slides are in N1970 and a
draft TS is in N1969.  It was emphasized that these were the result of
many years of work and discussion with engineers at JPL.  A vote on
the subject was postponed to allow further informal discussion.

[PL22.3 subgroup sessions and plenary from 11:45 to 16:15]

There was a discussion on the CHANGE TEAM construct in N1967. A proposal
that the rules be changed so that CHANGE TEAM involves the separate
synchronization of each of the teams it creates was approved 12-0-0.
A straw vote on a proposal that images of the parent team could access
subteams was 5-2-5.

Kees Ampt, a member of various programming language committees since
the mid 1970s, and especially active in WG5 from 1978 to 1985, gave a
presentation on the history of Fortran standardization, including
IRTF.  The slides are in N1984.  [Secretary's note; some related
historical information is also in N025, N030, N055 and N075 and in
http://www.fortran.bcs.org/standards/meek_hague_1977_report.pdf]

The meeting adjourned at 17:20.
...........................................................................
Thursday

It was proposed that subitem 1 of UK-04 in N1975 be adopted and that
subitems 2 and 3 not be addressed in Fortran 201x, subject to possible
WG5 review in 2014.  This was agreed 12-0-0.

Papers 13-276r1, 13-279, 13-280 and 13-282r1 which detailed edits to
N1967, were passed by unanimous consent.

There was a discussion on changing the requirements for further
coarray features.  A vote on whether to add syntax to specify a
codimension relative to another team was 6-0-6. A vote on whether to
allow general access of coarrays across subteams was 6-2-4.  A vote
on whether FORM SUBTEAM should allow choice of image number was
5-0-6.  A proposal that objects should include minimal portable
handling of failed images was approved by 9-1-2.  The revisions to
the requirements are in 13-292r1.

[PL22.3 subgroup sessions and plenary from 10:30 to 16:45]

There was a discussion on revision of N1925, the WG5 Strategic Plan
(agenda item 10).  The plan from 2012 had assumed that technical work
on the TS on further coarray facilities would be essentially complete
when revision of the full language was still in its preliminary
stages, enabling it to be incorporated into the revision.  This now
seemed unlikely.  Thus the question was whether, and by how much, the
schedule for the latter should be delayed, or whether the two
schedules should be uncoupled.  Discussion was adjourned to the
following day.

The meeting adjourned at 17:00.
...........................................................................
Friday

Reinhold Bader had asked David Muxworthy to act as his proxy in any
WG5 votes on Friday.

Papers 13-258r1, 13-263r1, 13-273r2, 13-287r1 and 13-290r1
which contain edits to N1967, were passed by unanimous consent.
Papers 13-288, 13-289 and 13-291 were withdrawn for reconsideration.

There was a discussion on the revision of requirements for the further
coarray TS (N1930).  It was proposed to delete the requirement that
when a block of code is executed on images executing as a team, it
should execute on those images as if the program contained no other
images.  A country vote was: delete the requirement 3 (CA, NL, US);
retain it 0; abstain 3 (DE, JP, GB).

There was a discussion on future meetings (agenda item 11.1).  It was
decided not to change the existing proposals for 2014 and 2015.  Dan
Nagle offered to investigate possibilities in the Boulder area for
2016.  This was gratefully accepted.

Two alternative plans for the schedule of the further coarray TS were
considered  (agenda item 10.1).  It was decided that decoupling the
TS schedule from the main language schedule could be avoided if the
former slipped by no more than four months.  The agreed schedule is
in N1979.

There were votes on whether WG5 should apply for a new project to
develop a TS on units of measure, following the presentation on
Wednesday.  The individual vote was: yes 3 - no 7 - abstain 1.  The
country vote was: yes 0 - no 3 (CA, JP, GB) - abstain 3 (DE, NL, US).

[PL22.3 subgroup sessions from 12:40 to 15:00]

Papers 13-264r3, 13-281r1, 13-288r1, 13-289r1 and 13-291r1 which
contained edits to N1967 were approved.  Paper 13-266r2 would
not be pursued.

[PL22.3 closing business was processed.]

10. WG5 Business and Strategic Plans
10.1 Goals for 2013-2016
These had been discussed earlier in the day.

11. Closing Business
11.1 Future meetings
The 2014, 2015 and 2016 meetings had been dealt with earlier in the
day.

11.2 Any other business
None was raised.

12. Adoption of Resolutions (N1978)
Resolutions D1, D2, D7 and D8 were approved by unanimous acclaim.
Resolutions D3 to D6 were approved by unanimous consent.

13. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 15:50 on Friday June 28, 2013.