J3/06-356r2 Date: 15 November 2006 To: J3 From: Dick Hendrickson Subject: Clause 13 Misc. issues References: J3/06-007R1, 06-333, 06-353 355:6 change "if POINTER" to "if and only if POINTER" 355:8 change "if POINTER" to "if and only if POINTER" Editor, please make corresponding changes in the other cases 378:14 It makes no sense to allow the FINDLOC value to be an array. Insert "scalar and " after "shall be". 392:6 Why is IS_CONTIGUOUS limited to assumed-shape and array pointers? Pages 87-88 give a whole list of things that are contiguous. Many are obvious, but we allow SQRT(0.) and LOGICAL(.TRUE.). This subsumes paper 06-333 and possibly interacts with 06-353. Delete " assumed-shape" and "or an array pointer. ------------------- Items for which no action or edits are needed 361:27+ (the line does not appear to be numbered.) Does the "nor shall Y..." clause apply to "Y shall not be present" or to "If X is..."? The sentence makes sense either way. RESPONSE: The sentence is clear, the nor clause applies to the initial "If X is " phrase. 376:16 Does EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE cause normal or abnormal termination if the command itself causes the termination? Something like EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE('stop me at noon") RESPONSE: No edits needed here. External interrupts are likely to be abnormal terminations. but that is not a property of EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE. 376:23 This says that command lines are executed synchronously if the processor doesn't support asynchronous execution. Actually, it might not support command lines at all, and adding "wait=.false." is unlikely to force it to. Edit: delete "; otherwise...synchronously". RESPONSE: The description of CMDSTAT covers this odd case. 384:3 None of the routines should cause undue anythings. Implementers know what this is for. Edit: Delete ", without undue overflow or underflow" Make a similar deletion at [350:13-14] for ABS 410:8 As with HYPOT, they should do the right thing. EDIT delete line 410:8 RESPONSE: in all three cases, the words clarify the intended use of the functions and provide information for both the user and implementer. 407:10-12 This paragraph describes the effects that the PURE subroutine has on things that aren't its arguments. MOVE_ALLOC can't be pure! This is probably a F2003 interp question, rather than a 2008 integration issue. This also affects 339:13 and note 13.1. RESPONSE: The standard allows pure subroutines to cause pointers to change their status.