(j3.2006) Generic resolution of assumed-size dummy

Lionel, Steve steve.lionel
Fri Jun 3 10:55:30 EDT 2016

True, but Daniel's question really is about whether a rank-1 assumed-size
dummy is distinguishable from a rank-N assumed-size dummy, since as he says,
we allow a rank mismatch for an assumed-size dummy (16-007r1 

Given that there's no wording in (again, 16-007r1) carving out an
exemption for assumed-size dummies, I would say that they are
distinguishable and that generic selection would require that the specific
that matches the rank be called.


-----Original Message-----
From: j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org
[mailto:j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org] On Behalf Of Bill Long
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 10:41 AM
To: fortran standards email list for J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Subject: Re: (j3.2006) Generic resolution of assumed-size dummy

assumed-rank is dimension(..).  That is different from assumed-size.


On Jun 3, 2016, at 9:35 AM, Daniel C Chen <cdchen at ca.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hello,
> Consider the following code:
> module checktest
> interface check
> module procedure checki1, checki2
> end interface
> contains
> subroutine checki1(ia1)
> integer*1, dimension(*) :: ia1
> end subroutine checki1
> subroutine checki2(ia1)
> integer*2, dimension(*) :: ia1
> end subroutine checki2
> subroutine checki3(ia1)
> integer*2, dimension(4,*) :: ia1
> end subroutine checki3
> subroutine checki4(ia1)
> integer*2, dimension(4,4,4) :: ia1
> end subroutine checki4
> end module checktest
> program main
> use checktest
> integer*2, dimension(10,5) :: ia1
> integer*2, dimension(4,4,4) :: ia2
> call check(ia1)
> Call check(ia2)
> end program main
> While we allow assumed-size dummy argument of a specific procedure
correspond to an array actual argument of any rank, it seems we don't allow
it for generic procedure.
> In the standard, we have:
> "A dummy argument is type, kind, and rank compatible, or TKR compatible,
with another dummy argument if the first is type compatible with the second,
the kind type parameters of the first have the same values as the
corresponding kind type parameters of the second, and both have the same
rank or either is assumed-rank.
> ...
> Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if ...
> they are both data objects or known to be functions, and neither is 
> TKR compatible with the other, ..
> "
> 1. It seems ia1 of checki2, checki3 and checki4 are distinguishable
according to the standard I quoted at the above because they have different
ranks, Is this expected?
> 2. If 1 is expected, should call check(ia1) resolves to checki3 and call
check(ia2) resolves to checki4? If so, it seems contradict to the sequence
association rule. 
> Thanks,
> Daniel
> XL Fortran Development - IBM Toronto Software Lab
> Phone: 905-413-3056
> Tie: 969-3056
> Email: cdchen at ca.ibm.com
> http://www.ibm.com/software/awdtools/fortran/xlfortran
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

Bill Long
longb at cray.com
Fortran Technical Support  &                                  voice:
Bioinformatics Software Development                     fax:  651-605-9142
Cray Inc./ Cray Plaza, Suite 210/ 380 Jackson St./ St. Paul, MN 55101

J3 mailing list
J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6616 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20160603/600e9979/attachment.bin 

More information about the J3 mailing list