From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 101deb,15c6ed4b761968e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid1094ba,gid101deb,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!edtnps90.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Gordon Sande <g.sande@worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1
Message-ID: <2006052810470116807-gsande@worldnetattnet>
References: <mubcg.13522$fb2.853@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
 <epcs4e.qb8.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> <tHkcg.6937$kR6.484@trnddc05>
 <0ugu4e.4i7.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
 <PkHcg.90575$Fs1.7198@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <To_cg.10095$S7.4017@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <%P_cg.155733$eR6.26337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <6H9dg.10258$S7.9150@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <XVadg.76594$_S7.45873@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
 <1hfv5wb.1x4ab1tbdzk7eN%nospam@see.signature>
 <pan.2006.05.25.12.11.52.919554@linuxchip.demon.co.uk.uk.uk>
 <2006052509454116807-gsande@worldnetattnet> <4475DA0F.5030603@comcast.net>
 <2006052514574816807-gsande@worldnetattnet> <m2r72h69vz.fsf@grendel.local>
 <e56c7o$94o$1@apollo.cs.kuleuven.ac.be>
 <2OEdg.167448$eR6.128849@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <dnZdg.11932$S7.8335@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <2006052712085316807-gsande@worldnetattnet>
 <Gy6eg.12060$S7.11688@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: Checking for Undefined
User-Agent: Unison/1.7.5
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 13:46:58 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.89.210.20
X-Trace: edtnps90 1148824018 24.89.210.20 (Sun, 28 May 2006 07:46:58 MDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 07:46:58 MDT
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4566 comp.lang.fortran:10384
 comp.lang.pl1:1787
Date: 2006-05-28T13:46:58+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2006-05-27 21:56:06 -0300, "robin" <robin_v@bigpond.com> said:

> "Gordon Sande" <g.sande@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:2006052712085316807-gsande@worldnetattnet...
> 
>> The practical man is likly to say that the problem here is the
>> GENERATION of the undefined values. That is when the execution should
>> be flagged as erroneous. Letting them be and tracking them is
>> awkward but seems to be an invented problem that is more the
>> unintended result of the particular wording. Assign the problem
>> to a thesis student and let the real world gt on with doing real
>> things. If undefined variable checking were to be part of the
>> standard then this is an issue that might deserve better wording
>> but I would not expect it make any realistic checklist.
> 
> Checking undefined variables has been around for a long time
> (more than 3 decades, maybe 4), and successfully in notable compilers
> such as WATFOR/WATFIV and PL/C.
> You will find that it's offered in some current Fortran compilers.

All of these were listed earlier but you have chosen to ingnore that.
Judging from other threads that is to be expected in your case.

The response was to a particular issue relating to the wording of
the processing of I/O lists in the presence of errors.