Re: question about elemental subroutines

[Brooks Moses <bmoses at stanford dot edu>]

Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
> How am I supposed to understand:
> > 12.7.3 Elemental subroutine actual arguments
> >
> > ...  . In the case that the actual arguments associated with INTENT (OUT)
> > and INTENT (INOUT) dummy arguments are arrays, the values of the
> > elements, if any, of the results are the same as would be obtained if the
> > subroutine had been applied separately, in any order, to corresponding
> > elements of each array actual argument.
>
> in the following case:
[...]
> where the result of 'nonassign' depends on the order of the calls?

The answer for this sort of question is always the same, and is very 
simple: if you reach an obvious contradiction like that, the code in 
question is illegal.

In the particular case illustrated by this section and your code, I 
believe the relevant contradiction can be found in the remainder of 
12.7.3, which notes that the arguments must follow the restrictions in 
12.4.1.6.  Those restrictions (as explained in note 12.22) do not allow 
changing an entity that is associated with multiple dummy arguments, as 
x(2) is in your code.

- Brooks