Re: [PATCH] Improve PR28796 (inconsistend __builtin_nan() and __builtin_unordered()) further

[Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>]

Richard Guenther wrote:

> but at that point we didn't convert all of the remaining "-ffast-math"
> (which just became flag_unsafe_math_optimizations check) to either
> flag_finite_math_only or flag_unsafe_math_optimizations.
>
> So I don't think we can say that all these bugs are regressions.  They
> are technically still wrong-code, so maybe applicable for fixing in
> mainline and branches once they are open for bugfixes again.

[Sorry for the late reply - catching up after holidays]

I meant flag_finite_math to be a sub-flag of -ffast-math.  Most people 
(at least in the hard sciences) know whether their models behave 
"correctly" without generating NaNs or Infinities.  That's what 
flag_finite_math is supposed to govern: The person compiling the code 
knows that his/her code won't generate NaNs or Infinities, unless 
there's an (unrelated) bug in the code.

--
Toon Moene - e-mail: toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
A maintainer of GNU Fortran 95: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/
Who's working on GNU Fortran: http://gcc.gnu.org/2006-01/msg00000.html