https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105473
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> --- My apologies for taking some time to get back to this. After a closer look, I realize that in the original test case there is no problem. The semicolon is an acceptable value separator regardless of decimal='point' or decimal='comma' Take these two examples: 1) The comma is the decimal keeper so semicolon must be used as the separator implicit none integer n,m,ios real r character(20):: testinput = '1;17;3,14159' n = 999 print *,'testinput = "',testinput,'"' read(testinput,*,decimal='comma', iostat=ios) n, m, r print *,'n=',n,' m= ', m,' r= ', r,' ios=',ios if(ios>0) print *,'testinput was not an integer' end program 2) The point is the decimal keeper so semicolon may be used as the separator or a comma implicit none integer n,m,ios real r character(20):: testinput = '1;17;3.14159' n = 999 print *,'testinput = "',testinput,'"' read(testinput,*,decimal='point', iostat=ios) n, m, r print *,'n=',n,' m= ', m,' r= ', r,' ios=',ios if(ios>0) print *,'testinput was not an integer' end program In the original test case, the semicolon is a separator and is simply ending the read as no value is there.
