g77 rejects things other compilers accept,
As time permits in the future, some of these things that are easy for
humans to read and write and unlikely to be intended to mean something
else will be accepted by
trigger warnings about such non-standard constructs).
g77 no longer gratuitously rejects sensible code,
you might as well fix your code
to be more standard-conforming and portable.
The kind of case that is important to except from the recommendation to change your code is one where following good coding rules would force you to write non-standard code that nevertheless has a clear meaning.
For example, when writing an
INCLUDE file that
defines a common block, it might be appropriate to
SAVE statement for the common block
SAVE /CBLOCK/), so that variables
defined in the common block retain their values even
when all procedures declaring the common block become
inactive (return to their callers).
SAVE statements in an
file would prevent otherwise standard-conforming code
from also specifying the
SAVE statement, by itself,
to indicate that all local variables and arrays are to
For this reason,
g77 already has been changed to
allow this combination, because although the general
problem of gratuitously rejecting unambiguous and
"safe" constructs still exists in
particular construct was deemed useful enough that
it was worth fixing
g77 for just this case.
So, while there is no need to change your code
to avoid using this particular construct, there
might be other, equally appropriate but non-standard
constructs, that you shouldn't have to stop using
g77 (or any other compiler)
gratuitously rejects it.
Until the general problem is solved, if you have
any such construct you believe is worthwhile
using (e.g. not just an arbitrary, redundant
specification of an attribute), please submit a
bug report with an explanation, so we can consider
g77 just for cases like yours.