[J3] Question not just for HPC

[John Reid]

Malcolm Cohen via J3 wrote:
> Please use the current standard to answer the question, not some other 
> document.

Whoops! I was looking at 10-007r1 because I wondered what was the 
situation in F08. So is there an inconsistency? It looks to me as if the 
compilers that rejected the statement x%q => p were correct for F08.

To recap, item (3) in 16.6.7 (of 10-007r1) says that a pointer 
assignment is a variable definition context and C1303 (of 10-007r1) says
"A lock variable shall not appear in a variable definition context 
except as the lock-variable in a LOCK or UNLOCK statement, as an 
allocate-object, or as an actual argument in a reference to a procedure 
with an explicit interface where the corresponding dummy argument has 
INTENT (INOUT)."

Cheers,

John.