(j3.2006) Pointer undefinition

[Bill Long]

On Sep 30, 2016, at 4:53 PM, Van Snyder <Van.Snyder at jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> 10.2.2.3p2 says that if the pointer target in a pointer assignment
> statement is allocatable, it shall be allocated.

So, if a program tries this, it is not conforming. 

> 
> 19.5.2.5 is silent concerning the event that the target is allocatable
> but not allocated.  Should it be in the list of events that cause the
> association status of pointers to become undefined?  I assume it ought
> not to be an event that causes the pointer to become disassociated (it's
> not in that list either).

I thought that this subclause was intended to be a collection of cases where the standard has stated semantics - i.e. actually says that the pointer association status becomes undefined.  I didn?t think we intended to include all variants of illegal pointer assignments as cases in this list. 

Cheers,
Bill

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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:  651-605-9024
Bioinformatics Software Development                     fax:  651-605-9142
Cray Inc./ Cray Plaza, Suite 210/ 380 Jackson St./ St. Paul, MN 55101