# Fortitude 0.7.0 release: a Fortran linter

**URL:** <https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/fortitude-0-7-0-release-a-fortran-linter/9297>\
**Category:** Announcements\
**Created:** [March 4, 2025, 5:24pm UTC](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/fortitude-0-7-0-release-a-fortran-linter/9297 "2025-03-04T17:24:26Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ivanpribec](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/fortran-lang.discourse.group/ivanpribec/32/3290_2.png) [@ivanpribec](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/u/ivanpribec)\
**Post date:** [March 4, 2025, 8:57pm UTC](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/fortitude-0-7-0-release-a-fortran-linter/9297/4 "2025-03-04T20:57:52Z")

</div>

> [@zedthree](#):
>
> or if there’s any other features or new rules you’d love to see!

This thread contains a potential new rule: [Compiler option to warn about argument declarations of x(1) instead of x(\*)](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/compiler-option-to-warn-about-argument-declarations-of-x-1-instead-of-x/9285)

The idea would be to mark `x(1)` (a legacy convention for arrays of unspecified length) variables as candidates for upgrade to `x(*)`, when `x` appears as a procedure dummy argument.

---

_[View the full topic](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/fortitude-0-7-0-release-a-fortran-linter/9297)._