[J3] sequence type equality
steve at stevelionel.com
Thu Oct 15 11:24:52 EDT 2020
On 10/15/2020 10:47 AM, Vipul Parekh via J3 wrote:
> How will marking SEQUENCE as Obsolescent be of any help with the
> immediate issue at hand which is the hole indicated by Bob when it
> comes to PURE procedures? Given the importance of PURE in modern
> programming using Fortran, isn't really the choice here to either
> strive to plug this hole or let the risk remain?
This thread is about "same type" determination. The PURE thing is a
separate (though related) discussion.
> Until something is Deleted, all features including the Obsolescent
> ones effectively seem to remain as "first-class" in the standard,
> don't they!?.
No. Compilers can warn about use of obsolescent features, documentation
can move discussion of the features elsewhere or otherwise diminish
their visibility, and textbook authors would be discouraged from
teaching them. The standard shows obsolescent features in a smaller font.
More information about the J3