To:         J3 Members                                       J3/16-153
From:       Van Snyder
Subject:    Description of SELECT RANK construct is still contradictory
Reference:  16-007
Date: 2016 January 27

1. Introduction
===============

16.5.1.6p2-3 specifies that an associating entity does not have the
ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute.

8.1.9.3p2 specifies that the associating entity has the ALLOCATABLE or
POINTER attribute if the selector has the attribute.

Either the description should be consistent, or caveats should be
included.

2. Proposal
===========

Do not specify that the associating entity has the ALLOCATABLE or
POINTER attribute, allowing 16.5.1.6p2 (admittedly eight clauses
distant) to be definitive, and provide a reference to 16.5.1.6.
Specify explicitly that the associating entity does not have the
ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute, as is proposed in 16-151.

Although it might be desirable for the associating entity to have the
ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute under some circumstances, as this
allows intrinsic assignment for polymorphic objects, allocation,
deallocation, pointer assignment, and inquiry concerning association,
the description should be consistent.  For optimization, there are
circumstances where the POINTER attribute is undesirable.  A better
solution, therefore, is to allow to specify whether an associating
entity has the ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute, as proposed in 16-152,
which is a NEW FEATURE proposal, and therefore out of order at this
time.

3. Edits
========

[188:28-39 8.1.9.3p2] Replace the first two sentences, viz. "If the
selector ... (and not the TARGET attribute)." with "The associate name
does not have either the ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute."

[188:40 8.1.9.3p2] After "8.1.3.3" append "and 16.5.1.6".

{This edit is also in 16-151.}