Re: uniqueness of {if,do,case}-construct-name
- From: Richard E Maine <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 22:16:15 -0700
In article <d4uu27$pi1$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
kargl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Steven G. Kargl) wrote:
> I've read through Chapter 8 of Final Committe Draft of the
> Fortran 95 standard, and I can't find where the if-construct-name,
> do-construct-name, and case-construct-name are required to be
> unique. Is such a constraint mandated by the standard?
It isn't a constraint, but yes. You are looking in the wrong chapter.
Pretty much all the name uniqueness stuff is in c14. I don't have it
handy in front of me right now, but look in the section about the scope
of local names. I think you will find that a construct name is a "class
1" local name (along with pretty much everything else).
There's a proposal to lift this restriction in the standard after f2003.
(I don't particularly favor the proposal, but I appear to be in a
minority on that).
--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: my first.last at org.domain | experience comes from bad judgment.
org: nasa, domain: gov | -- Mark Twain
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: uniqueness of {if,do,case}-construct-name
- From: Steven G. Kargl
- Re: uniqueness of {if,do,case}-construct-name
- References:
- uniqueness of {if,do,case}-construct-name
- From: Steven G. Kargl
- uniqueness of {if,do,case}-construct-name
- Prev by Date: uniqueness of {if,do,case}-construct-name
- Next by Date: Find the size of variables in Fortran
- Previous by thread: uniqueness of {if,do,case}-construct-name
- Next by thread: Re: uniqueness of {if,do,case}-construct-name
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
