https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93263
Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2020-01-15 CC| |burnus at gcc dot gnu.org, | |dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org Known to work| |8.3.1 Summary|-fno-automatic and |[9/10 Regression] |RECURSIVE |-fno-automatic and | |RECURSIVE Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail| |10.0, 9.2.1 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> --- GCC 8 (8.3.1 20200110) shows "8" in the last line. GCC 9 + 10/trunk show "9" -> Hence, it is a regression. My bet would be that it has been caused by the fix for PR 37835, r268098 – in particular the following bit: --- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c +++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c @@ -16675,3 +16675,3 @@ resolve_types (gfc_namespace *ns) - if (ns->save_all) + if (ns->save_all || !flag_automatic) gfc_save_all (ns);