(j3.2006) implicit none ordering

[Bill Long]

We have a constraint

	? C590  (R563) If IMPLICIT NONE is specified in a scoping unit, it shall precede any PARAMETER statements that appear in the scoping unit. No more than one IMPLICIT NONE statement shall appear in a scoping unit.

Which leads to comparison with Table 2.1 in 2.3.2 Statement ordering (page 33 in 15-007r2).  

Is the IMPLICIT NONE in C590 and in Table 2.1 only the version where there is no <implicit-none-spec>?   For example, is this allowed:

PARAMETER (x = 1.23)
IMPLICIT NONE (EXTERNAL)

Separately, 

1) Could the right middle box in Table 2.1 (Derived-type definitions ? and statement function statements) be shortened  by replacing some of the current entries with ?specification constructs??

2) Is the table correct, since executable constructs include BLOCK constructs, which can contain specification statements?


Cheers,
Bill

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