@rwmsu, what do you mean by “name mangling”? See the example I provide in the thread I linked above. Where is the name mangling?
Re: “To me that defeats the purpose of the original idea behind the Fortran C-Interop facility” - no, it does not. Take a look at the example I provide. The code in Fortran is compact and highly functional and thus at a higher level of abstraction. Whereas it is at a low level in C. This is exactly as one would want. Subliminally, it should inform and influence scientists and technologists and engineers to move more of their coding to a higher level language of Fortran offering efficient computation with functional offering of containers of their data rather than raw pointers and user-defined structs to work with them, like in C.
I agree it cuts both ways, but overall my vision will be to take Fortran higher with about 6 to 10 more facilities and abstractions toward them, as I have listed here. Then if other languages want to interoperate with the abstractions in Fortran, a few more coding instructions in a companion processor (such as C) is what shall be on the anvil.