(j3.2006) defining a type with no components

[Malcolm Cohen]

>Given 10-007r1 and
>
>type :: no_comp
>end type no_comp
>
>and then
>
>type( no_comp) :: foo
>
>is foo defined?

Yes.

>Does 10-007r1 say that foo is of zero size?

No, it says it is not of zero size, see 449:23-25 (it occupies a single 
unspecified storage unit).

>(If so, I can?t find it.)

Good!

>If foo be of zero size, then [454:29-30] would apply.
>If foo were an array, then [454:23] would apply.

Try [452:34].  This answers all the definition questions.

>does [454:8-10] need to say ?type and kind??

No.

>also, [455:1] (32) seems to be on the wrong list
>(it should be on the next list, not this one?)

It is apparently correct as is since it is saying something is becoming defined.

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