To: J3 Members J3/17-117r2 From: Van Snyder & Bill Long Subject: Comments concerning atomic subroutines References: 17-007 Date: 2017 February 14 1. Introduction =============== Several of the atomic subroutines in 16.9.20 - 16.9.30 include a requirement of the form "The values of VALUE and ATOM + VALUE shall be representable in ATOMIC_INT_KIND." These are nonsense because ATOMIC_INT_KIND is a named constant, if the phrase actually refers to the ATOMIC_INT_KIND defined in the intrinsic module ISO_FORTRAN_ENV. This interpretation of ATOMIC_INT_KIND is already stated earlier in the same paragraph. 2. Edits ======== [360:19] In 16.9.20 ATOMIC_ADD, the description of VALUE, replace "in ATOMIC_INT_KIND" with "in kind ATOMIC_INT_KIND". [360:34] In 16.9.21 ATOMIC_AND, the description of VALUE, replace "in ATOMIC_INT_KIND" with "in kind ATOMIC_INT_KIND". [362:5] In 16.9.24 ATOMIC_FETCH_ADD, the description of VALUE, replace "in ATOMIC_INT_KIND" with "in kind ATOMIC_INT_KIND". [362:23] In 16.9.25 ATOMIC_FETCH_AND, the description of VALUE, replace "in ATOMIC_INT_KIND" with "in kind ATOMIC_INT_KIND". [362:41] In 16.9.26 ATOMIC_FETCH_OR, the description of VALUE, replace "in ATOMIC_INT_KIND" with "in kind ATOMIC_INT_KIND". [363:15] In 16.9.27 ATOMIC_FETCH_XOR, the description of VALUE, replace "in ATOMIC_INT_KIND" with "in kind ATOMIC_INT_KIND". [363:33] In 16.9.28 ATOMIC_OR, the description of VALUE, replace "in ATOMIC_INT_KIND" with "in kind ATOMIC_INT_KIND". [364:21] In 16.9.30 ATOMIC_XOR, the description of VALUE, replace "in ATOMIC_INT_KIND" with "in kind ATOMIC_INT_KIND".