[J3] ballot #47

[Robert Corbett]

I am sorry, but my comment for
F18/025 is missing some text.
I have added the text below.

> On Oct 6, 2021, at 6:40 AM, Robert Corbett via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> Yes  No   Number    Title
> 
> -C-  ---  F18/007  Problems with C_FUNLOC and C_F_PROCPOINTER being PURE
> -Y-  ---  F18/015  Example in C.6.8 is wrong
> -Y-  ---  F18/019  PURE and default initialization
> -Y-  ---  F18/023  CLASS(*) ambiguous operator overloading
> -Y-  ---  F18/024  CFI_setpointer with result a deferred length character
> ---  -N-  F18/025  Is component initialization an attribute?
> -Y-  ---  F18/026  C_SIZEOF argument
> -Y-  ---  F18/027  CO_BROADCAST with allocatable component
> -Y-  ---  F18/028  Specification inquiry
> -Y-  ---  F18/029  Type of main argument of CO_REDUCE
> -Y-  ---  F18/030  CO_REDUCE/REDUCE OPERATION with coarray argument
> -Y- --- F18/031  CO_BROADCAST with polymorphic argument
> -Y-  ---  F18/032  CO_BROADCAST and pointer components
> 
> F18/007 C
> I agree with Daniel that C_FUNLOC can
> be PURE without causing a problem.  I
> also agree that making C_FUNLOC
> impure loses almost no functionality.
> 
> F18/025 N
> The proposed fix is an example of bad
> language design.  It has the potential to
> needlessly break existing standard
> conforming codes.  Many better fixes
> are possible.  A simple fix is to ban
> type names of sequence types and
> BIND types that contain non-null data
pointer initializations 
> from appearing in pure
> code.
> 
> Robert Corbett representing Corbett