[J3] BLOCK construct change

Mark LeAir mleair at nvidia.com
Tue Jun 28 21:15:17 UTC 2022


Neither does nvfortran.

From: J3 <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org> On Behalf Of Steidel, Jon L via J3
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 2:12 PM
To: General J3 interest list <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>; J3 List <j3 at j3-fortran.org>
Cc: Steidel, Jon L <jon.l.steidel at intel.com>
Subject: Re: [J3] BLOCK construct change

External email: Use caution opening links or attachments

ifort, gfortran (11.2) and NAG (7.0) do not give errors on this program.

-jon

From: J3 <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org<mailto:j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org>> On Behalf Of Robert Corbett via J3
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 4:03 PM
To: J3 List <j3 at j3-fortran.org<mailto:j3 at j3-fortran.org>>
Cc: Robert Corbett <rpcorbett at att.net<mailto:rpcorbett at att.net>>
Subject: [J3] BLOCK construct change

The program

----------------------------------------------------------------
      MODULE VAR
        INTEGER MC
      END MODULE VAR

        BLOCK
          USE VAR
          MC = 0
        END BLOCK
      END
----------------------------------------------------------------

conforms to the Fortran 2008 standard, but it violates syntax
rule R1109 of the Fortran 2018 standard and the Fortran 202X
draft standard.  Was this change intentional or accidental?
If it was intentional, what was the reason for the change?
If it was accidental, does it require an interpretation
request?  Does any existing compiler that implements BLOCK
constructs diagnose the violation of the syntax rule?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20220628/43804b87/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the J3 mailing list