http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57628

--- Comment #16 from Ryo Furue <furue at hawaii dot edu> ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #12)
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 11:33:49PM +0000, furue at hawaii dot edu wrote:
> > 
> > Is this an inconsistency in the implementation of -no-range-check ?
> 
> No.

Then, what's the counterpart of -fno-range-check that takes care of such cases
as sqrt?  To repeat the code:

  real, parameter:: a = -1.0
  if (a > 0) write(*,*) sqrt(a)

With such a switch turned on, the compiler can replace sqrt(-1.0) with NaN and
let the code pass.

Or is it better to extend -fno-range-check to cover these cases, too?

Cheers,
Ryo

Reply via email to