Hello,

J3's response to the public comments
has been posted to J3's web site at

http://www.j3-fortran.org/doc/year/08/08-272.html

html format is used to enable access
to the primary documents as links.

I'm very proud of J3's efforts last week at 185.
9 people in 4.5 days processed about 75 documents.
For each paper, we had to read it, understand it,
analyze it, reckon a response, and then get the words
right to make it happen.

We weren't able to include "large" changes,
but we did include "small" changes where we could.
Where an issue was too difficult, we submitted
an interpretation request to document the issue
for future processing.

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:02:27 GMT, Dan Nagle posted:

Wow, Dan, that looks like a mountain of work.

I noticed in J3's reply to FX a misspelling:

Unfortunately, the premise that intrinsic assignement between character
variables of different kind is allowed is wrong. See table 7.10 on page 152
of the draft: "Type conformance for the intrinsic assignment". Character
assignments are only allowed for "the same kind type parameter". J3
believes the mapping between characters of different kind is difficult to
define. Consequently, J3 declines to make this addition.

Maybe this thread could consider corrections, in particular typos.

Hello,

On 2008-08-19 20:23:45 -0400, Ron Ford said:

Sorry, no one caught it. :-(

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:42:35 GMT, Dan Nagle posted:

There's others, but no big deal: it's way to much pressure to have to think
and spell at the same time. That's why God created peer review.

The response that *really* caught my eye was to Richard, who shares my
opinion regarding f08. (He didn't even ask to borrow it.)

Dan Nagle verizon.net> wrote:

...

Indeed. Obviously a lot of work there (and handily presented, too; kudos
to whoever did that). On skimming, I find that I disagree with a few
things, to no great surprise, though mostly not major stuff.

I didn't really expect acceptance of my comment, though I felt I should
make it anyway. Probably the one other big thing is about the biggest
single new feature in the draft. I share Bob Corbett's concern about
co-arrays. (Hmm. I haven't studied it, but I wonder if an implementation
might be able to squeek by with allowing only a single image and then
making most of the co-array stuff pretty much collapse into extra rank
of ordinary arrays.)

One somewhat trivial point I noticed. I also disagree with the reply to
Corbett's comment about the multiple models for generic intrinsics
(J32024). The descriptive model for generic intrinsics changed...

Ron Ford wrote:

Gary Scott sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Richard Maine wrote:

Gary Scott wrote:
...

The problem is that these issues are beyond the scope of the
Fortran standard. I think the committee should just go ahead
with permitting mixed-KIND character operations and use
the "implementation dependent" description. Then in the
section notes they should reference the appropriate other
standards (ASCII, ISO-8859-*, EBCDIC, etc.). Those
other standards are where the appropriate correspondences
are defined.

Richard Maine schrieb:
[...]

I'm pretty sure such an implementation would be conforming. However there's
a large class of parallel patterns which needs at least two images to run correctly,
and/or without blocking.

[...]