(j3.2006) Clarify F08/0147 ?
Tue Nov 3 17:08:33 EST 2015
In working through the test case in Interp F08/0147, I think I understand the change, but the words I was looking for are not part of the answer. The test case is:
Module Procedure edasgn
Elemental Subroutine edasgn(a,b)
Class(t),Intent(Out) :: a
Class(t),Intent(In) :: b
a%c = -b%c
Type(t) :: x(n),z(m)
Type(t),Allocatable :: y(:)
x%c = [ (i,i=1,n) ]
z%c = [ (i,i=1,m) ]
y = x ! A
y = z ! B
With the change made by the edits, it appears that
1) The assignment A is defined assignment and is conforming (from first edit).
2) The assignment B is not standard conforming, since the shapes are not the same (from second edit).
3) Effectively, auto-reallcation on assignment will not occur if the assignment is defined assignment and the subroutine is elemental (since the shapes already agree).
All of which is fine with me.
Bill Long longb at cray.com
Fortran Technical Support & voice: 651-605-9024
Bioinformatics Software Development fax: 651-605-9142
Cray Inc./ Cray Plaza, Suite 210/ 380 Jackson St./ St. Paul, MN 55101
More information about the J3