From JANSHEP@torolab2.vnet.ibm.com Thu Feb 16 10:45:49 1995
Received: from vnet.ibm.com by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA17289
  (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>); Thu, 16 Feb 1995 21:45:34 +0100
Message-Id: <199502162045.AA17289@dkuug.dk>
Received: from TOROLAB2 by VNET.IBM.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8137;
   Thu, 16 Feb 95 15:45:25 EST
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 15:45:49 EST
From: "Janice Shepherd" <JANSHEP@torolab2.vnet.ibm.com>
To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk
Subject: defect item 173
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

'John Reid' wrote:
>
> No. Suppose we have:
>         INTEGER, TARGET  :: FROM(2)
>         INTEGER, POINTER :: TO(:)
>         :
>         TO => FROM(2:1:-1)
>         CALL MVBITS(FROM,1,10,TO,1)
> We need to disallow this,
> but FROM and TO are not storage associated.

I agree with Rich Maine that while the variables FROM and TO are
not storage associated the actual arguments are storage associated
as specifying the variable TO is equivalent to specifying the
target of the variable TO as the actual argument.

I agree with Rich Bleikamp that the edit does disallow the example.
Janice