https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95104
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Bill Long from comment #3)
> A comment from the original user: gfortran 8.3.0 appears to do the right
> thing. So perhaps a regression somewhere in the 9.x line?
A note of the gfortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95104
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95104
--- Comment #3 from Bill Long ---
A comment from the original user: gfortran 8.3.0 appears to do the right
thing. So perhaps a regression somewhere in the 9.x line?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95104
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95104
--- Comment #1 from Bill Long ---
The program appears to be legal and should execute and print 0.
The last paragraph of 12.7.2 WAIT statement (current Fortran standard) is
Execution of a WAIT statement specifying a unit that does not exist,
