To: J3 J3/18-264 From: Van Snyder Subject: Inconsistencies between LOCAL and BLOCK Date: 2018-October-12 Introduction ============ C1128 prohibits a variable with LOCAL locality from having the ALLOCATABLE attribute, from being finalizable, or from being a coarray. 11.1.7.5p1 specifies that a variable with LOCAL locality is a different entity in every iteration of a DO CONCURRENT construct, and further specifies that a construct entity within the DO CONCURRENT construct is ... "similar to LOCAL locality" (but not "as if LOCAL locality"). C1128 does not prohibit a variable declared within a BLOCK construct within a DO CONCURRENT construct from having the ALLOCATABLE attribute, from being finalizable, or from being a coarray. This is inconsistent. Edits ===== [181:22 C1128 (eighth constraint after syntax rules in 11.1.7.2 Form of the DO construct] Delete "LOCAL or". [181:24 C1128] Before "A ..." insert a sentence: "A variable that appears in a LOCAL shall not have the INTENT(IN) or OPTIONAL attribute, shall not be a nonpointer polymorphic dummy argument, and shall not be an assumed-size array." Question ======== Should this be an interp? It does change technical content.