(j3.2006) Access spec on interface blocks

Lionel, Steve steve.lionel
Thu Apr 9 11:21:32 EDT 2015

A customer sent me the following question:


will it be possible for you to give feedback on any possible reasons you can
think of to reject a standard enhancement proposal for PUBLIC attributes on
INTERFACE blocks?  One example scenario:

module m




   implicit none




   !.. What possible reasons could there be to disallow the following?

   !interface, public :: operator(.foo.)   !.. why not!?

   interface operator (.foo.)

      module procedure foo_1

      module procedure foo_2


   end interface


   public :: operator(.foo.)  !.. this won't needed if public attribute
allowed as above



I could not find a discussion of such a proposal. Has it been suggested
before? Offhand I can't think of any problems this would cause, though
adding the attribute syntax would require lots of words as to what is NOT
allowed there! I am NOT suggesting this as a new work item at this time!





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20150409/1d1b2318/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6616 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20150409/1d1b2318/attachment-0001.bin 

More information about the J3 mailing list