https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=125747
--- Comment #7 from Harald Anlauf <anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #6) > (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #4) > > > > I think we should not allow this extension for modern DO constructs. > > > > I think it should be disallowed in FORALL as well. The error > message in resolve.cc(gfc_resolve_iterator) is guarded with > gfc_notify_std (GFC_STD_F95_DEL...). F95 never allowed REAL > iterators and FORALL was introduced in this standard. > > F95, p.114 > > R750 forall-triplet-spec is index-name = subscript : subscript [ : stride] > R617 subscript is scalar-int-expr > R603 stride is scalar-int-expr > > If it breaks code in the wild, so what? The code was never correct. +1 When I specify -std=f2023, do j = 1, 0.3 end do is already rejected, and forall (j = 1:0.3) end forall anyway. So it is actually a regression...
