[J3] [EXTERNAL] Re: Changing address of an allocatable on assignment when shapes match

[Malcolm Cohen]

We do say so! We state precisely when “reallocation” happens. It’s not called “reallocation” either; it is called “deallocating” followed by “allocating”.

And “reallocation” is already in the reasons, seeing as how it is stated as “deallocation”, which is already in the reasons.

Cheers,

From: Van Snyder via J3 
Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2019 9:39 AM
To: j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org 
Cc: Van Snyder 
Subject: Re: [J3] [EXTERNAL] Re: Changing address of an allocatable on assignment when shapes match

On Sat, 2019-08-24 at 09:10 +0900, Malcolm Cohen via J3 wrote:
> In general, it would not be conforming to do the reallocation if the
> allocatable array has the TARGET attribute, as this would break the
> Fortran pointer association semantics. 

If we don't want reallocation if the <variable> has the TARGET
attribute, we need to say so.

Otherwise, reallocation should be added to the reasons a pointer's
association status becomes undefined.



Disclaimer

The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is: Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom. Please see our Privacy Notice for information on how we process personal data and for details of how to stop or limit communications from us.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20190824/b87f2917/attachment.html>