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