J3/10-188 To: J3 From: Stan Whitlock Subject: interp: PROCEDURE POINTER vs PROTECTED Date: 2010 June 15 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NUMBER: F03/0037 TITLE: PROCEDURE POINTER vs PROTECTED KEYWORDS: PROCEDURE, PROTECTED DEFECT TYPE: Erratum STATUS: J3 consideration in progress QUESTION: Is the following module fragment correct syntax for an abstract interface i_f? procedure(i_f), pointer, protected :: p_f1 => null() F2008 10-007 [100:4] C549 says "An entity with the PROTECTED attribute shall be a procedure pointer or variable." But 12.4.3.6 [287:11+] does not list PROTECTED as an allowable attribute on the procedure declaration statement. ANSWER: The module fragment was intended to be standard-conforming. An edit is provided to correct this. EDITS to 10-007: [287:15+] in R1213 after "<> POINTER", insert a new line "<> PROTECTED" SUBMITTED BY: Stan Whitlock HISTORY: 10-188 m192 F03/0037 submitted ----------------------------------------------------------------------