Subject: hpff-doc: Comments on Mapping in Subprogram Calls

From: Rob Schreiber <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 16:50:51 -0700

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[email-masked] is a mailing list for HPF 2.0 language specification
authors and editors.  Instructions for adding or deleting yourself from this
list appear at the bottom of this message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is no longer possible to write "combinations of mapping directives
that are partly transcriptive and partly descriptive" (or is it?)

Suggested rewordings in Section 3.5 on explicit interfaces:

item 3.  For every pair of corresponding actual and dummy arguments, either:

   (a) They are both implicitly mapped, or
   (b) They are both .... (as it is now).

item 4.   Same reconstruction.

I think this is easier to parse, absorb, and understand.

Page 66, in advice to users:

Note that an e.i. can be provided in three ways.

   1.   Module procedures have an e.i.
   2.   Contained subprograms have an e.i.
   3.   An e.i. may be provided in an interface block.

The parenthetical comment in point 1 at the top of page 67
"(Actually, in that example, .....)
can be omitted -- it is distracting.

p.71    It is not necessary to put place names in quotes, no matter
HOW long or unpronouncable they are.   Looks funny to do so.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To (un)subscribe to this list, send mail to [email-masked].
Leave the subject line blank, and in the body put the line
(un)subscribe <email-address>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 13:31:41 EDT

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[email-masked] is a mailing list for HPF 2.0 language specification
authors and editors.  Instructions for adding or deleting yourself from this
list appear at the bottom of this message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 16:50:51 -0700
   From: Rob Schreiber <[email-masked]>

What about examples like this?

	!hpf$ distribute * onto *square :: d1
	!hpf$ distribute *(block,block) onto * :: d2

These look like still legal combinations of transcriptive and descriptive
to me (not that I'm championing their preservation), though within a 
single directive. 

(Now that you can't combine INHERIT and DISTRIBUTE, I don't think you
could have a multiple directive mixture as described above.)