Issue 308 - PAD= Specifier in the INQUIRE Statement

To:	J3

From:	Craig Dedo

Date:	June 4, 2001

Subject:	Issue 308 - PAD= Specifier in the INQUIRE Statement

Issue

The editor writes:

The above-specified UNDEFINED value for PAD= needs an F95 interp and an entry in 1.5.1 or 1.5.2.

Analysis

We almost resolved this issue at meeting 156. Paper 01-111r3 made the fix to the INQUIRE statement's PAD= specifier and changed the entire content of Issue 308 through a floor amendment. Paper 01-172 proposed Interpretation 92, which makes the same fix as 01-111r3 in Fortran 95. Both papers passed unanimously. The J3 ballot on Interpretation 92 just closed.

We ought to insert the same incompatibility language that is in Interpretation 92 into either 1.5.1 or 1.5.2 so that we can get rid of this issue once and for all. Since we do not know whether Interpretation 92 will get into a Fortran 95 corrigendum, it is a toss-up whether we should put this language into 1.5.1 or 1.5.2. Therefore, we should choose one of those sections and authorize the editor to transfer this language to the other section on his own initiative if we guess wrong on the fate of Interpretation 92.

For the purposes of making a placement decision, I will assume that Interpretation 92 will not get into a Fortran 95 corrigendum. Therefore, I propose that we place the incompatibility language into section 1.5.1 and have J3 authorize the editor to change the placement if necessary.

Edits

[3:23+]	Add the following paragraph to section 1.5.1, "Fortran 95 compatibility":

The PAD= specifier in the INQUIRE statement in this standard returns the value UNDEFINED instead of YES if there is no connection or the connection is for unformatted input/output.

[204:11-14]	Delete the J3 internal note.

References

01-007r1, Fortran 2000 Draft

01-111r3, Issue 308 - Oddities for PAD= in INQUIRE

01-172, Interpretation 92 - Values of the PAD= Specifier in the INQUIRE Statement

[End of J3 / 01-237]