(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5646) [ukfortran] Another comment on Corrigendum 4

[Van Snyder]

These exchanges are quite valuable to avoid spending valuable time at
meetings on things we can resolve beforehand.

On Sun, 2016-01-24 at 15:17 +0900, Malcolm Cohen wrote:
> Flogging a dead horse here, but...
> 
> >> (2) "potential subobject component" applies to objects as well as types.
> >> Just look at the definition - no limitation to types is implied inferred 
> >> or
> >> stated.  Objects as well as types have components, and thus have 
> >> potential
> >> subobject components.
> >
> >I thought 4.5.1p5 was the definition.  Is the summary of it in 1.3.35.3
> >the complete and correct definition?
> 
> Obviously the answer to the question "are the definitions in 1.3 mere 
> summaries or actual definitions" is "they are the actual definitions, as 
> stated, and as required by ISO".
> 
> But even if we ignore that, the 4.5.1p5 citation has strangely overlooked 
> 4.5.1p6, the very next paragraph which states
>   "The components, direct components, potential subobject components, and 
> ultimate components of an object of derived type are the components, direct 
> components, potential subobject components, and ultimate components of its 
> type, respectively."
> 
> So we have even dotted the eyes and crossed the tees.
> 
> Cheers,