Thanks @amontoison, this is why it's so annoying that gfortran added support for QUIET so late.

It doesn't seem to be an issue for the Python interface as it checks the return code.

The fortran standard is rather vague about this, but I now believe

STOP

gives status = 0, but does not output a message

STOP code

gives status = exit, written to standard error. Thus I propose that we have

IF ( status == 0 ) THEN
STOP
ELSE
WRITE( out, &
"( /, ' Error exit from decoding stage. terminating execution.' )" )
STOP status
END IF

Any feelings or objections?

https://www.cita.utoronto.ca/~merz/intel_f10b/main_for/mergedProjects/lref_for/source_files/rfstop.htm#:~:text=If%20stop%2Dcode%20is%20specified,to%20stop%2Dcode%20is%20returned.

Ah so this would avoid echoing STOP 0, seems like a sensible change to me. I'll shout if anything breaks.

Another thing, although we pass a code using STOP, it is equally valid to pass a string (which is then echoed). Indeed, I suspect that the code is actually passed as a string ... I'm not suggesting we do, but it would be more friendly than simply getting a final "STOP 3" message.

So long as the return codes don't change I'm happy.

I presume that the MACOS actions machine is down, as all MAC jobs time out waiting for a server. Is this the US Gov shutdown in action?

That seems likely!

The fortran standard is rather vague about this, but I now believe

STOP

gives status = 0, but does not output a message

STOP code

gives status = exit, written to standard error. Thus I propose that we have

IF ( status == 0 ) THEN STOP ELSE WRITE( out, & "( /, ' Error exit from decoding stage. terminating execution.' )" ) STOP status END IF

Any feelings or objections?

https://www.cita.utoronto.ca/~merz/intel_f10b/main_for/mergedProjects/lref_for/source_files/rfstop.htm#:~:text=If%20stop%2Dcode%20is%20specified,to%20stop%2Dcode%20is%20returned.

I approve theses modifications 👍