[J3] [EXTERNAL] Re: USE statement – wish: permit specifying additionally the access-spec

Robert Corbett rpcorbett at att.net
Fri Nov 15 19:39:57 EST 2019

My first thought was that C815
prohibits this case.  If the attributes
PRIVATE and PUBLIC are both
regarded as the accessibility
attribute, it is prohibited.  If not,
there seems to be a missing
restriction in the existing text of
the standard.

Bob Corbett

> On Nov 15, 2019, at 3:38 PM, Van Snyder via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 23:04 +0000, Bill Long via J3 wrote:
>> While I'm not part of the Data subgroup, I’m pretty sure that the
>> design for this feature was not an oversight.  Rather, it likely had
>> to do with the fact that public and private declarations are limited
>> to being only in a module, whereas USE statements (often) appear
>> outside modules. Sure, you could add in a constraint that the
>> access-spec cannot be specified in a USE statement that is outside a
>> module, but that is just one extra complication that is not needed
>> with the current design. 
>> That said, we already permit redundant ways to specify public and
>> private for many other situations. So I would not be opposed to this
>> idea.  Some comment from /Data would be informative.
> Another reason not to put an access-spec on a USE statement is that a
> scoping unit can have more than one USE statement for the same module.
> What is the effect of
>  use, private :: A
>  use, public :: A
>> Cheers,
>> Bill
>>> On Nov 15, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Vipul Parekh via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 11:32 AM Tobias Burnus via J3
>>> <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
>>>> ..
>>>> I still believe that a use-stmt with access-spec is more readable than
>>>> use-stmt + access-stmt, but I agree that the functionality is already
>>>> covered. Hence, I think one should still (re)consider it – but with low
>>>> priority.
>>>> ..
>>> Tobias makes a good point.
>>> Is it possible to know whether there was a reason besides an oversight
>>> as to why access-spec with the USE statement was not introduced in
>>> Fortran 2018 itself when the deficiency with the default accessibility
>>> for entities accessed from a module was addressed?
>>> If this is an oversight with Fortran 2018, then how can one exhort J3
>>> but importantly WG5 to include this and other such "Features that
>>> address deficiencies and discrepancies" on the Fortran 202X work-list?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Vipul Parekh
>> Bill Long                                                                       longb at cray.com
>> Principal Engineer, Fortran Technical Support &   voice:  651-605-9024
>> Bioinformatics Software Development                      fax:  651-605-9143
>> Cray, a Hewlett Packard Enterprise company/ 2131 Lindau Lane/  Suite 1000/  Bloomington, MN  55425

More information about the J3 mailing list