http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> --- On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 07:57:23AM +0000, furue at hawaii dot edu wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628 > > --- Comment #2 from Ryo Furue <furue at hawaii dot edu> --- > > Of course. I agree with all your statements. > > And your entirely entirely miss the point! > No, I did not miss your point. > This is a "quality of implementation" issue. So, the compiler should just arbitrarily chose to evaluate some expression and ignore others? > The question is "Is refusing to compile it the best way to deal with this > error?" My answer is no. Since, > > real, parameter:: a = 0 > If (a > 0) then So, the compiler should evaluate "a > 0", but it should > write(*,*) 1/a !! this part not evaluate "1/a". > end if > > the contents of the IF statement is unreachable, the compiler more > appropriately would issue an "unreachable statements" warning > and disregard the contents of the unreachable code. DCE will take care of unreachable code in the middle-end. Just remove the PARAMETER attribute in your code, it it will do what you. real :: a = 0 if (a > 0) then print *, 1/a else print *, 'doh!' end if end
