[J3] Question about SPLIT and TOKENIZE

[Malcolm Cohen]

Hi Rich,

 

I see no problem with starting to do purely editorial edits next meeting. I
will need to update SD-008 if we pass anything.

 

As the existing wording is unambiguous, I think we need not panic about it
for F2023.

 

Cheers,

-- 

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

 

From: J3 <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org> On Behalf Of Bleikamp, Richard
via J3
Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 12:08 AM
To: General J3 interest list <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Cc: Bleikamp, Richard <Richard.Bleikamp at amd.com>
Subject: Re: [J3] Question about SPLIT and TOKENIZE

 

[AMD Official Use Only - General]

 

Happy New Year to everyone!

 

I believe Brad is correct, the behavior for when SET or STRING is zero
length is implied (correctly),  but not explicitly stated (the entire
contents of STRING is by definition a single token, including when STRING is
zero length).  

 

Malcolm, when can we start submitting edits for F202y?  Is the next meeting
ok?  And do you agree a clarifying edit is appropriate?

 

Rich

 

From: J3 <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org
<mailto:j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org> > On Behalf Of Brad Richardson
via J3
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2022 9:32 AM
To: General J3 interest list <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
<mailto:j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> >
Cc: Brad Richardson <everythingfunctional at protonmail.com
<mailto:everythingfunctional at protonmail.com> >
Subject: Re: [J3] Question about SPLIT and TOKENIZE

 

	
Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution
when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. 

 

I will note that SCAN and VERIFY both have explicit behavior defined for
zero length STRING and SET. It would probably be prudent to do the same
here. If SET is zero length, it would make sense to treat the entirety of
STRING as a single token. If STRING is zero length, it makes sense to
consider it as a single, zero length token. I believe the current wording
implies this, but it doesn't hurt to spell it out.

 

Regards,

Brad

 

On Thu, 2022-12-22 at 08:53 +0900, Malcolm Cohen via J3 wrote:

Hi folks,

 

It has been pointed out to me by Van Snyder that these don't make much sense
when the SET argument is a zero-length string.

 

As I read the wording, it looks like these will just select the whole of
STRING as a single token. So maybe it's not actually broken.

 

Should we require SET to have length greater than zero? (This would be a
minor technical change if so.)

 

Cheers,

-- 

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

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20230105/775e5342/attachment.htm>