09-123 To: J3 From: Malcolm Cohen Subject: Spurious defined terms in clause 5. Date: 2009 January 29 1. Introduction --------------- The system for "defining" terms we used in previous versions of the standard is not in accordance with the ISO guidelines, so we need to stop using it. We have already introduced the ISO-compliant defined terms subclause, and moved/copied many definitions into it. However, quite a lot have not been revised. These should either - be turned into normal text ("untermified") or - become proper defined terms. This paper deals with the terms in clause 5. 2. Terms and what to do with them --------------------------------- - explicit-coshape coarray: Obvious BNF-derived Term, Only Used Once; = untermify, do not index. (It is only used within the short - halfpage - subclause whose title is "Explicit-coshape coarray", so needs no indexing.) - contiguous: Special Term; = termify, index as definition. - NAMELIST statement: It's A Statement; = untermify, index as statement. - EQUIVALENCE statement: It's A Statement; = untermify, index as statement. - COMMON statement: It's A Statement; = untermify, index as statement. - common block storage sequence: Obvious Enough, Rarely Used; = untermify, index as definition. - size of a common block: Normal Usage; = untermify, index as definition. 3. Edits to 09-007 ------------------ [6:12-14] Delete second definition of "construct entity". {I think this must have been an editing mistake. The first one is, I believe, correct and complete - listing the construct entities which the second definition does simply makes the standard longer and less maintainable.} [6:15-(1.3.28-)] Immediately before the term "corank", define term "\term{contiguous} of a multi-part data object, that the parts in order are not separated by other data objects; of an array, having array elements in order that are not separated by other data objects, as specified in 5.3.7" {5.3.7 is \ref{D5:CONTIGUOUS attribute}. I'm not really satisfied with this wording, but it will do if we cannot come up with anything better. Yes, we use "contiguous" on complex and character strings already, that's why the extended definition.} [throughout] Hyperlink "contiguous" and index as appropriate. [90:14(5.3.6.3p1)] Unembolden "explicit-coshape coarray", do not index. [91:11(5.3.7p2)] Unembolden "contiguous", index as definition. [109:2(5.6p1)] Unembolden "NAMELIST statement", index as statement. [110:9(5.7.1.1p1)] Unembolden "EQUIVALENCE statement", index as statement. [112:10(5.7.2.1p1)] Unembolden "COMMON statement", index 5.7.2 as stmt. [113:25(5.7.2.2p1)] Unembolden "common block storage sequence", index 5.7.2.2 as definition. [113:37(5.7.2.3p1)] Unembolden "size of a common block", index 5.7.2.3 as definition. ===END===