[J3] Inconsistent terminology in 18-007r1

Malcolm Cohen malcolm at nag-j.co.jp
Sun May 9 03:47:59 UTC 2021


> Maybe this has already been fixed.

 

Maybe there is nothing wrong.

 

>3.49
>default initialization
...

> Shouldn't 3.49 mention the allocation status of allocatable components?



No it should not. Default initialization does not affect allocatable components in any way.

 

> The sentence is 7.5.4.6(1) seems odd.

 

No, the last sentence (Allocatable components are always initialized to unallocated.) is correct.

 

> The last sentence should read as "The allocation status of an allocatable component is unallocate."

 

No it should not. It is correct as is. The suggested replacement is both ungrammatical and incorrect (the allocation status of an allocatable component is not always unallocated, it is merely initialized to be unallocated).

 

Perhaps this is not the best possible place to mention how allocatable components start out, as this is not “default” initialization but “always” initialization. But I think it is not completely unreasonable. An obvious alternative would be to have a new 5.4.2.x subclause for allocatable components, containing this statement and nothing else apart perhaps from waffle and references to other subclauses. Is that a good idea? Maybe, but I would not say it’s really necessary.

 

> The hyperlink of 'variable (9)' takes one back to 3.154.



That is correct and as it should be. Hyperlinked defined terms take you to the definition.

 

We could add a reference to 5.4.3.2.2 to the end of the definition of “variable”. I did not think it was necessary for comprehension, but would it help? The key part of the definition of “variable” is the “that can be defined or redefined during execution” part, not the “data entity” part; as you noticed, data entity is the most general term applying to any non-procedure that has or can have a data type.

 

> So, in summary, "Allocatable components are always initialized to
>unallocated." seems to be a rather loose use of the word initialized.



I do not see anything wrong here.

 

Cheers,

-- 

..............Malcolm Cohen, NAG Oxford/Tokyo.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20210509/867c1302/attachment.htm>


More information about the J3 mailing list