This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: jFP religious wars
- From: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: "R. D. Flowers" <rd at chatta dot us>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:38:16 -0500
- Subject: Re: jFP religious wars
- References: <1079845736.15963.ezmlm@gcc.gnu.org> <405E0544.6020905@chatta.us> <878yhtkis8.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com>
Zack Weinberg wrote:
"R. D. Flowers" <rd@chatta.us> writes:
would not some flag like -fp-pedantic (or however to fit in the
namespace) be a good idea (for both decent sets of folks: the
fast-and-a-little-dirty and the clean-and-a-little-slow people)?
Maybe. What would it do?
I don't think this would work. There is nothing "pedantic" in
the carefully formulated rules that make it easier/possible
to write accurate floating-point code. It is far better to
have the existing flags for -ffast-math etc, which clearly
warn that the resulting semantics may be unreliable.
The use of -pedantic to cover little used language features
or rules is one thing, the use of a flag like this to give
incorrect semantics.