ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5 N1408

To:		WG5
From:		F2K Review Subgroup
Subject:	Review of J3/00-007R2, Part II.
Reference:	J3/00-240

Note: <> means italics, <<>> means bold face, {} means obsolescent
font, and [] encloses page and line numbers that refer to J3/00-007r2.

[250:4-5] Point out in a comment that because argument B1 has assumed
shape and argument B2 does not, a non-contiguous array section can be
the actual argument associated with B1 without causing additional
performance problems, but that if a non-contiguous array section is the
actual argument associated with B2, a copy operation may be necessary.

[259:16] R1201 is the wrong syntax rule number. Should be R1219.

[261:10-11] Change "unless...procedure" to:  "unless an array of the
same rank that is not an unallocated allocatable array and not a
disassociated pointer is supplied as an actual argument associated with
a nonoptional dummy argument of that elemental procedure."

[324:1] Change "pointer" to "pointer or procedure pointer".

[343:34-37] Change "dummy...;" to "dummy argument that corresponds by
position in the argument list to a nonoptional dummy argument in the
other that is type- incompatible, has a different kind type parameter
or a different rank, or for which there is no corresponding argument;
and" [343:38-40] Change "dummy...rank." to "dummy argument that
corresponds by argument keyword in the argument list to a nonoptional
dummy argument in the other that is type-incompatible, has a different
kind type parameter or a different rank, or for which there is no
corresponding argument." Reason: To avoid confusion with arguments
being present in the sense of the PRESENT intrinsic function or simply
being declared and to avoid "correspondence" between items that are NOT
corresponding (one argument list may, for example be shorter than the
other).

[344:35] Delete line.
Reason: not needed because of [344:40] (as changed immediately below)
and new wording in 5.1.2.10 that specifies that an interface confers
the EXTERNAL attribute.  [344:40] Change line to "(d) if there is an
explicit specification of the EXTERNAL attribute (5.2.1.10) in that
scoping unit".

[345:4,9] The term "consistent" is used. This should be defined more
precisely in terms of characteristics of dummy and actual arguments.
[345:4-14] These paragraphs do not explicitly apply to defined
operations, defined assignments, or user-defined input/output. They
apply indirectly to defined operations by way of the phrase "it is
generic in exact analogy to generic procedure names" at [250:15], but
there is no parallel statement for defined assignment or user-defined
derived-type input/output.  Suggestion: For J3 for consideration.
[345:7] Change "that interface block" to "the interface block".
[345:13] Change "that interface block" to "the interface block".

[400:25] Needs to refer also to 12.3.2.1.2.
[400:27] Needs to refer also to 12.3.2.1.1.

[402:10+] <<generic interface>> needs to be in the glossary.
[404:22+] <<pure>> needs to be in the glossary.

[459:1+] This is very probably an unnecessary remark, but we have
noticed that some BNF definitions and keywords are missing in the
index, such as
<end-function-stmt>
<end-interface-stmt>
<end-subroutine-stmt>               (<end-program-stmt> IS in the index)
<import-stmt>
<specification-part>
<<IMPORT>>
It is very helpful to the reader to have all the BNF terms and keywords
in the index.

[468] It is surely an error that the index location for "type
specifier" is 67-??