J3/02-184

Date:     April 26, 2002
To:       J3
From:     Dick Hendrickson
Subject:  Clarify wording about companion processor and C processor

It was pointed out in comp.lang.fortran that the sentence on page 43,
lines 18-21, ties the term "companion processor" more tightly to
a C processor than we need since the companion processor need not
be a C processor (and in the future might even be a Pascal processor).

It says

However, a storage order is implied for a sequence type (4.5.1.9). If
the derived type has the BIND attribute, the storage sequence is that
required by the companion processor (2.5.10) for an entity of a C
struct type with which an entity of the derived type is interoperable
(15.2.3).

Proposal:  Change the above sentence 43:19-21 to

"However, a storage order is implied for a sequence type (4.5.1.9). If
the derived type has the BIND attribute, the storage sequence is that
required by the companion processor (2.5.10).  If the companion
processor is a C processor, then the entity shall be of a type that is
interoperable with a C struct type entity (15.2.3)".