(j3.2006) free source form continuations

[Malcolm Cohen]

I agree with everything Kurt wrote, in particular:

> I am inclined to agree with the user that the lack of a confirming & on the 
> second line implies that the two lines cannot be be one token (based on the 
> requirement of 3.3.2.4p3).  I see nothing in 3.3.2.4p2 that contradicts this. 
> However, the fact that clever consideration of 3.3.2.4p3 makes these two 
> separate tokens doesn't eliminate the requirement of 3.3.2.2p2 that there be a 
> blank between the two tokens, so the program is not standard conforming.

and

>I could imagine some future revision of the standard extending 3.3.2.4p3 so the 
>absence of the confirming & would be considered equivalent to a blank between 
>the two lines (as opposed to a revision that removed the requirement in 
>3.3.2.4p3).

I note we already have "The end of a record has the effect of a blank, except 
when it appears within a character constant." (list-directed input), so 
following that rule for source form as well would be nicely consistent.

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