(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5221) [ukfortran] Ballot on draft DTS

Damian Rouson sourcery
Fri Apr 18 14:42:50 EDT 2014


On Apr 15, 2014, at 12:35 AM, Malcolm Cohen <malcolm at nag-j.co.jp> wrote:
> 
> In particular,
> (1) the collectives CO MAX, CO MIN, CO REDUCE, CO SUM, should be split into two 
> forms, one with RESULT, one without.  The one with RESULT should have SOURCE as 
> INTENT(IN), the one without should have SOURCE as INTENT(INOUT).  RESULT must 
> not be optional.  The SOURCE INTENT(IN) form should have no coarray restrictions 
> on SOURCE.

Is the reasoning here that there is a potential performance advantage that can be preserved in the ?INTENT(IN)? case?  If so, I agree that performance is paramount.  If not, please explain the reasoning for wanting two forms rather than having RESULT optional. 

Damian



More information about the J3 mailing list