This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine)

To: moshier at moshier dot ne dot mediaone dot net
Subject: Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine)
From: Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:14:52 +1000
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds at transmeta dot com>, tprince at computer dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0107291240270.881-100000@penguin.transmeta.com> <Pine.LNX.4.20.0107291643380.23001-100000@moshier.ne.mediaone.net>

On 29-Jul-2001, Stephen L Moshier <moshier@mediaone.net> wrote:
> 
> Further, GCC is supposed to be standards compliant by default.

?

I think it would be nice if GCC was standards compliant by default,
but that is certainly not the status quo.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine)
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

References:
- Re: * Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative lawin combine)
  - From: Linus Torvalds
- Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law incombine)
  - From: Stephen L Moshier

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]