(j3.2006) entities declared in block constructs

[Van Snyder]

It looks like IMPLICIT is permitted in a BLOCK construct, and whichever
version of nagfor that Malcolm used to test the proposition has a
defect.  The third line of R1109 <block-specification-part> is
<implicit-part>, which gives the syntax for a sequence of IMPLICIT (and
other) statements.  So that brings back Erik's original question.

On Sat, 2017-07-15 at 13:39 +0200, erik at forcheck.nl wrote:
> Thanks Malcolm,
> 
> I am happy to hear IMPLICIT is not permitted in a BLOCK.
> 
> In Fortran 2008 8.1.4 C806 lists IMPLICIT as not permitted in a BLOCK
> construct.
> In Fortran 2008 11.1.4 C1107 IMPLICIT is not in that list.
> 
> Thanks,
> Erik
> 
> Erik Kruyt
> Forcheck b.v.
> 
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org [mailto:j3-bounces at mailman.j3-
> > fortran.org] Namens Malcolm Cohen
> > Verzonden: zaterdag 15 juli 2017 02:03
> > Aan: 'fortran standards email list for J3' <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
> > Onderwerp: Re: (j3.2006) entities declared in block constructs
> > 
> > >I also struggle with the following:
> > >
> > >block
> > >  implicit integer (r)
> > 
> > Error: junke.f90, line 2: The IMPLICIT statement is not permitted in a
> BLOCK
> > construct
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > --
> > ................................Malcolm Cohen, NAG Oxford/Tokyo.
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > J3 mailing list
> > J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> > http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3