What is acceptable for -ffast-math? A numerical viewpoint

[Laurent Guerby]

dewar@gnat.com wrote:
<<
Yes, it should also be the case that the field testing should show that
there is some gain. There is no point in having non-"correctness"
preserving transformations unless there is at least some evidence of
an advantage. Probably the best thing is to first put in the optimization
under its own special switch. Then if there is a real gain, and no
unacceptable surprises, then it can be made part of -ffast-math.
>>

You didn't read my 3 lines message, performance gain is to be reported
in step 2:

<<
2. volunteers field test it and report on performance and precision
                                        **PERFORMANCE**
>>

Do you actively oppose to this proposal after rereading it?

-- 
Laurent Guerby <guerby@acm.org>