[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