(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5578) J3/16-257 interp letter ballot #34 - due 20-Nov-2015 shortened- m209

[Robert Corbett]

The following Fortran interpretations are being balloted:

Yes  No   Number    Title

-C-  ---  F03/0042  IEEE funny values and Standard real generic intrinsic
                      procedures
-Y-  ---  F08/0109  LOCK_TYPE and unlimited polymorphic
-Y-  ---  F08/0145  Can initial-data-target be coindexed?
-C-  ---  F08/0147  Is generic resolution of elemental assignment done
                      at runtime?
-Y-  ---  F08/0148  Pointer subobject in structure constructor in
                      pure procedure

----------------------------------------------------------------------
F03/0042 C

I agree that the language of the standard no longer requires
processors that implement IEEE floating-point arithmetic to signal
exceptions in cases where they should not.

I find some of Fred Tydeman's suggestions better than what the
standard specifies.  For example, I think he is correct that
SPACING should return +infinity if the argument is an infinity.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
F08/0147 C

I agree that the semantics specified by the standard are weird.  I do
not know of a processor that implements those semantics.  I am
concerned that no guidance is provided as to what processors should
implement.  I expect most processors to continue to implement
whatever they currently do in the cases of the assignments banned by
the proposed interpretation.


Robert Corbett
representing Oracle America