To: J3                                                     J3/22-200
From: John Reid
Subject: DIS edit re IMAGE_INDEX
Date: 2022-October-18
References: 22-153r2, 22-191, N2209 (DIS)

Discussion
----------

Paper 22-153r2, which was passesd at meeting 227, contained the edit

[402:15] In 16.9.107 IMAGE_INDEX (COARRAY, SUB) ..., para 3, COARRAY,
sentence 2, change
"an ancestor" to "the parent" so that the sentence reads
"If TEAM_NUMBER appears and the current team is not the initial
team, it shall be established in the parent of the current team."
[It's the parent that matters. We do not need to mention ancestors of
the parent. ]

In paper 22-191, Malcolm Cohen commented
"If TEAM_NUMBER appears and the current team is the initial team,
 COARRAY does not have to be established. Is that deliberate? What
 about an unallocated allocatable, or an allocatable that is only
 established in one or more subteams? Obviously an unallocated
 allocatable does not make sense, but it does not appear to be ruled
 out. And only established in a subteam looks problematic."

Yes, we have failed to cover this case. There is a separate sentence for
it in 9.6 Image selectors, para 3. I think we intended the rules for
IMAGE_INDEX to be consistent with the rules in an image selector, so I
think we need a sentence here very like that in 9.6.


Edit to the DIS
----------------

In 16.9.107 IMAGE_INDEX (COARRAY, SUB) ..., para 3, argument COARRAY,
before "If TEAM appears" add
"If TEAM_NUMBER appears and the current team is the initial team, it
shall be established in the initial team and the value of TEAM_NUMBER
shall be the team number for the initial team."