To: J3 J3/19-236 From: Malcolm Cohen Subject: Image selectors and team numbers Date: 2019-October-14 1. Introduction Paper 19-180 contains three purported interpretation requests glommed into a single paper. This paper discusses the first of them. 2. The alleged problem From 19-180: "Section 9.6, paragraph 3 explains the semantics of image selectors that specify TEAM=, TEAM_NUMBER=, or that specify neither. There are several problems with this paragraph. ... "If TEAM_NUMBER= is specified in an image selector, the coarray must be established in an ancestor team. This does not allow TEAM_NUMBER= to specify the team number of the current team and reference a coarray established in the current team." 3. Response from /INTERP Team numbers are only meaningful for accessing sibling teams. Accessing coarrays within the current team is completely adequately provided for by omitting any team specification. The requirement being complained about, that the coarray be established in an ancestor team, is not unclear, ambiguous, or contradictory, nor does it go counter to the purpose of the facility in question (TEAM_NUMBER=). Team specifications are specifically provided to enable access to coarrays in other teams. Using team specifications in a situation where the coarray cannot be established in another team is counter to the purpose of the facility. Furthermore, encouraging the use of TEAM_NUMBER= not to access a sibling team, but only the current team (and only the current team number would be acceptable), would also appear to be error prone as well as misleading. /INTERP concludes that there is no error identified in the standard, merely an alleged lack of functionality. Also, it is not clear that said "missing" functionality is desirable. As an apparent request for new functionality, /INTERP politely declines to accept this as an interpretation request at this point in time. Instead, /HPC is requested to review its history to see whether this alleged missing functionality was both omitted by accident and is so highly desirable that we need to add it to the standard right now. If the conclusion of /HPC is that this was an accidental omission that warrants immediate correction rather than being processed as a new feature request, /INTERP will accept it and process it accordingly. However, it should not be combined with any other interpretation request. ===END===