This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: numerical instability and estimate-probability
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- To: dewar at gnat dot com
- Cc: jh at suse dot cz, gcc-pdo at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, mrs at windriver dot com, rth at redhat dot com
- Date: 18 Nov 2001 12:09:15 -0200
- Subject: Re: numerical instability and estimate-probability
- Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
- References: <20011118134509.8D034F28AB@nile.gnat.com>
On Nov 18, 2001, dewar@gnat.com wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 11:31:52AM -0800, mike stump wrote:
>>> It is advantageous to have gcc emit the same code, on different hosts
>>> for the same source code. This currently works.
>> No, it doesn't. We have code that is affected by the undefined
>> order of evaluation of function arguments. E.g.
>> foo (gen_reg_rtx (...), gen_reg_rtx (...))
> I see no good argument for damaging code quality by insisting on a canonical
> order of evaluation here. The standard allows non-determinism here quite
> deliberately for a good reason.
No disagreement here. It's just that rth's comment rang a bell and I
wanted to confirm it.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me