(j3.2006) PURE function vs subroutine

[Tom Clune]

My understanding is that this is not a technical issue, but rather a statement requiring pure functions to align with the conventional notion of a mathematical function.    I.e. functions have only one output (the function result), and no ?side-effects? on the ?input? parameters.

On Mar 4, 2015, at 12:14 PM, Daniel C Chen <cdchen at ca.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> Can someone shed light on why a nonpointer dummy argument of a pure function that is not VALUE must be INTENT(IN) where such a dummy argument of a pure subroutine can be INTENT(OUT)/INTENT(INOUT)?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Daniel
> 
> XL Fortran Development - IBM Toronto Software Lab
> Phone: 905-413-3056   
> Tie: 969-3056   
> Email: cdchen at ca.ibm.com
> http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/fortran/xlfortran
> 
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

Thomas Clune, Ph. D. 				<Thomas.L.Clune at nasa.gov>
Head ASTG,Code 606
NASA GSFC		
MS 610.8 B33-C128
Greenbelt, MD 20771
301-286-4635









-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20150304/23c9281c/attachment-0001.html