(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5645) [ukfortran] Another comment on Corrigendum 4
Thu Jan 21 19:06:26 EST 2016
>Another comment on Corrigendum 4
I do not think this is a comment on Corrigendum 4.
>Is C1278a, as amended by Corrigendum 4, not yet correct?
> C1278a An INTENT(OUT) dummy argument of a pure procedure shall not be
> polymorphic or have a polymorphic allocatable ultimate component.
I agree that on the face of it, it would appear that we have not yet closed
all the holes in purity. Another interp would seem to be required. Or
since we have no chance of a Corrigendum 5, perhaps some more drastic action
in the next revision.
........................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.
More information about the J3