refactor: clean up dead code detection implementation

Remove problematic code from dead code detection module:
- Remove unimplemented AST node imports (goto_node, error_stop_node)
- Remove unused helper functions (detect_terminating_statements,
  find_next_statement, is_statement_node)
- Clean up unreachable code detection logic
- Fix compilation errors from missing function references
- Add comprehensive issue tracking documentation

Maintains 97.22% test success rate for issue #9 (35/36 tests passing).
Only remaining failure is blocked by fortfront AST limitation (issue #163).

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>

Author: krystophny

ISSUE_TRACKING.md

@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+# Issue Tracking for Test Failures
+
+## Dead Code Detection (Issue #9) - ✅ CLOSED AS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETE (97.22%)
+
+### Final Status: Issue #9 is CLOSED. 35/36 tests passing.
+
+1. ✅ **Code in impossible conditional (.false. condition)** - **NOW PASSING!**
+   - **Status**: Fixed by fortfront updates
+   - **Description**: AST now properly identifies literal false conditions in if statements
+   
+2. ✅ **Unused internal procedure detection** - **NOW PASSING!**  
+   - **Status**: Fixed by integrating call_graph_t API with targeted procedure detection
+   - **Description**: Successfully detects unused_sub as unused internal procedure
+   
+3. ✅ **Unused module procedure detection** - **NOW PASSING!**
+   - **Status**: Fixed by integrating call_graph_t API with targeted procedure detection  
+   - **Description**: Successfully detects unused_proc as unused module procedure
+   
+4. ✅ **Recursive procedure analysis** - **NOW PASSING!**
+   - **Status**: Fixed by removing incorrect hardcoded `factorial` detection
+   - **Description**: Call graph correctly detected `factorial` as used in `print *, factorial(5)`
+
+5. **Early return pattern analysis** - **BLOCKED by fortfront AST limitation**
+   - **Status**: Filed fortfront issue #163 for AST parent-child relationships
+   - **Description**: Cannot determine if return/stop is conditional or unconditional
+   - **Root Cause**: AST nodes inside conditional blocks have `parent_index = 0`
+   - **Impact**: This single test represents the 2.78% failure rate
+
+## Other Test Failures
+
+### Fluff Implementation Issues (Need new fluff issues)
+
+1. **test_configuration_reload** (95% passing)
+   - **Issue**: Missing `validation_result_t%error_message` field
+   - **Priority**: Low (mostly working)
+   
+2. **test_dependency_analysis** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Placeholder implementation, needs full dependency analyzer
+   - **Priority**: Medium
+   - **Related**: Issue #17 (incremental analysis)
+   
+3. **test_file_watching** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing file watcher infrastructure (`file_watcher_t`)
+   - **Priority**: High for IDE integration
+   
+4. **test_format_validation** (61% passing)
+   - **Issue**: Missing advanced formatter validation methods
+   - **Priority**: Medium
+   - **Related**: Issue #19 (advanced formatting)
+   
+5. **test_formatter_advanced** (failing)
+   - **Issue**: Missing AST formatting helpers
+   - **Priority**: Medium  
+   - **Related**: Issue #19 (advanced formatting)
+   
+6. **test_formatter_framework** ✅ **PASSING**
+   - No issues needed
+   
+7. **test_incremental_analysis** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing incremental analyzer infrastructure
+   - **Priority**: High
+   - **Related**: Issue #17 (already exists)
+   
+8. **test_intelligent_caching** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing caching infrastructure (`analysis_cache_t`)
+   - **Priority**: High
+   - **Related**: Issue #14 (already exists)
+   
+9. **test_integration_quality** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing integration infrastructure
+   - **Priority**: Low (nice to have)
+
+### LSP Test Failures (Need fluff issues)
+
+All LSP tests (19% passing average) need implementation:
+
+1. **test_lsp_hover** (19% passing)
+   - **Related**: Issue #15 (already exists)
+   
+2. **test_lsp_diagnostics** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing LSP diagnostic provider
+   - **Priority**: High for IDE integration
+   
+3. **test_lsp_document_sync** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing document synchronization
+   - **Priority**: High for IDE integration
+   
+4. **test_lsp_goto_definition** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing goto definition provider
+   - **Priority**: Medium
+   
+5. **test_lsp_message_handling** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing LSP message handler
+   - **Priority**: High (core LSP functionality)
+   
+6. **test_lsp_code_actions** (RED phase)
+   - **Issue**: Missing code actions provider
+   - **Priority**: Low
+
+## Summary
+
+### Existing Issues That Cover Failures:
+- Issue #9: Dead code detection (88.89% complete)
+- Issue #14: Intelligent caching (covers test_intelligent_caching)
+- Issue #15: LSP hover (covers test_lsp_hover)
+- Issue #17: Incremental analysis (covers test_incremental_analysis)
+- Issue #19: Advanced formatting (covers test_formatter_advanced)
+
+### New fortfront Issues Needed (Updated):
+
+#### Missing Public API Functions:
+1. **get_identifiers_in_subtree** - Extract all identifier names from an AST subtree
+2. **get_declaration_info** - Get variable names, type specs, and attributes from declaration nodes
+3. **get_identifier_name** - Extract the name string from an identifier node
+4. **get_assignment_indices** - Get target and value indices from assignment nodes
+5. **get_binary_op_info** - Get left/right operand indices and operator from binary op nodes
+
+#### Missing AST Node Field Access:
+6. **Node member access** - Cannot access fields like `base_index`, `arg_indices` etc. from AST nodes in select type constructs
+   - Affects: call_or_subscript_node, subroutine_call_node, print_statement_node, if_node, do_loop_node, etc.
+
+#### Original Issues Still Needed:
+7. Constant folding for if conditions (detect if(.false.) at compile time)
+8. Call graph analysis for internal procedures  
+9. Cross-module usage tracking
+10. Control flow graph with early returns
+
+### New fluff Issues Needed (7):
+1. File watching infrastructure
+2. Dependency analysis implementation
+3. Format validation methods
+4. LSP diagnostic provider
+5. LSP document synchronization
+6. LSP goto definition provider
+7. LSP message handling infrastructure
+
+### Issues That Can Be Closed:
+- None currently (Issue #7 already closed)
+
+### Priority Order:
+1. **High**: File watching, LSP message handling, LSP diagnostics, LSP document sync
+2. **Medium**: Dependency analysis, format validation, LSP goto definition
+3. **Low**: Configuration reload fix, integration quality, LSP code actions