[J3] For review: Official US position on features for F202X

[Daniel C Chen]

There could have been just one slot in the C-descriptor that is a pointer
to another struct that stores all processor-dependent information so that
the offset of all mandatory fields are preserved. That being said, it will
break the backward compatibility still.

Daniel

XL Fortran Development, Fortran Standard Representative
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



From:	Steve Lionel via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
To:	General J3 interest list <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Cc:	Steve Lionel <steve at stevelionel.com>
Date:	03/07/2019 10:53 AM
Subject:	Re: [J3] For review: Official US position on features for F202X
Sent by:	"J3" <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org>



On 3/7/2019 10:51 AM, Bill Long wrote:
> I don’t see how binary compatibility of C descriptors can work at the
implementation level, unless it includes enough “processor-dependent”
padding to include room for all the fields needed by particular
implementations.   And, of course ,it introduces an incompatibility that
would require rebuilding a lot of software.

That's quite true, but I had some ideas of another way of handling the
fundamental problem and will write them up.

Steve



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20190307/6952d542/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20190307/6952d542/attachment.gif>