Re: [Patch/fortran] Add documentation section about implemented F2003 features

[Richard E Maine <Richard dot Maine at nasa dot gov>]

Rereading my own post, one unclear referent and one possibly confusing 
typo.

On Aug 3, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Richard E Maine wrote:

> > hope I have explained well enough why I think that the F95
> > allocatables are a good thing
>
> Agree. Again, I've never known a single person who thought otherwise. 
> That includes the people who wrote it.
>  It was more of an oversight and failure to come up with a good 
> alternative. I don't think they thought this was actively a good idea 
> as much as that they didn't have a good idea at the time (but later 
> found one).

By "it" above, I meant the f90 stuff; that's what was an oversight..

> >  and that F90 allocatables should not be
> > supported,
>
> See above. You already do support "f90 allocatables". There is no such 
> thing as an f90 allocatable that isn't also an f90 allocatable.

Make that "There is no such thing as an f95 allocatable that isn't also 
an f90 allocatable."

--
Richard Maine                |  Good judgment comes from experience;
Richard.Maine@nasa.gov       |  experience comes from bad judgment.
                            |        -- Mark Twain