[J3] [EXTERNAL] Re: Why is += missing?

[Vipul Parekh]

On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 10:50 AM Reuben D. Budiardja <reubendb at ornl.gov>
wrote:

> On 09/01/2021 10:21 PM, Vipul Parekh via J3 wrote:
> >
> > Many aspects of modern Fortran (and by this I mean revisions starting
> > with Fortran 90) with block constructs have the look and feel of
> > technical "grammar" and as such, it is welcome to my peers and
> > colleagues.  From what I have seen and learnt, I believe something like
> > a 'WITH` _statement _clause will go better with modern Fortran when it
> > comes to statement-scope association:
> >
> >     with (s => 3*i+1) a(s) = b(s)
>
>
> But isn't this essentially ASSOCIATE construct?
>
> ASSOCIATE ( s => 3*i+1 )
> a(s) = b(s)
> END ASSOCIATE
>

Reuben,

If you look back at my note, you'll notice it was predicated on the notion
that has been expressed in this email chain and which is also often seen
elsewhere that ASSOCIATE is onerous, especially when the need for
`associate-name` is a small section of code, often simply a statement.

Thus the concept of statement-scope.  The premise behind my `WITH`
statement clause suggestion was to introduce something *integrates* with
the current language *without* introducing special characters that can have
special meaning, often depending on the context.

Regards,
Vipul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20210902/6d9f410b/attachment.htm>