[J3] sequence type equality

Damian Rouson damian at sourceryinstitute.org
Thu Oct 15 01:48:34 EDT 2020

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 1:27 PM Bill Long via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>

> Relevance:  Since the advent of modules 3 decades ago, I’ve never se use
> of, or relevance of SEQUENCE types.
> Mystery: Why is SEQUENCE not in the Obsolescent list?

I'm curious about this too.  Currently, obsolescent features are features
for which better methods existed in a previous standard. If a feature has
limited utility, however, it's unlikely that a better method would ever be
developed so we might need to expand how we describe the nature of

Like Bill, I have never seen SEQUENCE in use other than in
compiler documentation or textbooks.  I find descriptions online of two use
cases (see http://k2.chem.uh.edu/F95_Reference.pdf):

1. Argument association of equivalent types, and
2. Sequence association in COMMON blocks.

Use case 1 seems similar to EQUIVALENCE, which is obsolescent.  Use case 2
is also obsolescent.  Unless I'm misreading or "misunderestimating" the
uses, I think there's a strong case to be made for classifying SEQUENCE as

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20201014/cf9bb6a4/attachment.htm>

More information about the J3 mailing list