(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5125) [ukfortran] [ Draft corrigendum 3]

[Malcolm Cohen]

I wrote:
> Please answer the following question "Is N1995, with the references and
> notes removed, acceptable for submission to SC22 for publication as
> Corrigendum 3 for Fortran 2008?" in one of these ways.
>
> 3) No, for the following reasons.
>
> The edits for F08/0086 do not work.  This interp must be failed and restarted,
> and the corrigendum must be altered to remove it.

Bill Long replied:
>I'm happy with this comment.  But what is the larger plan?
>
>1) The rest of the Corrigendum is OK and your vote changes to YES if the
>F08/0086 edits are removed and we move forward with what remains, or

I have not checked the rest of the corrigendum yet...

>2) Fixing the problem raised by F08/0086 is sufficiently important to
>put the Corrigendum on hold until it is repaired and put up for another
>vote, considering that this is the final Corrigendum for F2008.

If we follow the normal "back to square one" procedure, that is a delay until 
April at the most wildly optimistic (February meeting + J3 letter ballot + WG5 
letter ballot).

Here is a third alternative:
3) New corrected edits are unanimously agreed by WG5 and J3
   during the Corrigendum ballot.  A single "No" vote should definitely
   send this interp back to stage one (but not the rest of the corrigendum).

I attach a corrected interp, the differences are:

(i) New syntax term "<assumed-implied-spec>" (I did not like my own suggestion 
of "<star-bounds>").  "assumed-implied" rather than "implied-assumed" because 
assumed-size arrays are described first.

(ii) I "improved" the edit for [95:33] cosmetically, as well as using the new 
syntax term.

(iii) Used the new syntax term in R522, twice.

(iv) New edit for [96:28] to use the new syntax term in the rank determination.

(v) Removed NOTE (1) and reformatted the remainder.

I think this is right this time, but who knows?

If anyone is unconvinced that this is right, or is uncomfortable with the idea 
of such a radical last-minute fix, we should send this back though the system to 
get a more leisurely review.

Cheers,
-- 
................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo. 
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: mjc002.txt
Url: http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20131204/9e1baac5/attachment-0001.txt