On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Van Snyder <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I agree with Tom that SELECT TYPE and SAME_TYPE_AS ought to be
> consistent.
>
> On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 12:51 +0000, Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101) wrote:
>> Ouch. Granted that I use this rarely, and mostly in the well-defined
>> context of an inheritance tree. But now I need to go and look to see
>> if I have any ticking bombs in code that use CLASS(*).
>>
>>
>> I think that a strong case should be made that the behavior of this
>> intrinsic should be consistent with SELECT TYPE which does really end
>> up being SELECT TYPE AND KIND.
>>
>>
Yes, it makes complete sense SAME_TYPE_AS be consistent with SELECT TYPE.
As an ordinary Fortran enthusiast, it is extremely, extremely
disconcerting to see a situation where an intrinsic procedure
introduced as recently as Fortran 2008 standard revision can end up as
"useless".
How can such a situation be avoided? Can one or more members of the
standards committee please follow up and the "do the needful" to fix
the darn thing? It's a plea. "Leave it alone" is an entirely
unacceptable position.
But I hope in the process the committee will not end up degrading the
SELECT TYPE functionality in the standard in any way whatsoever!
Thanks much,
Vipul
|