Porposal: Floating-Point Options

[Mirza]

Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> I would avoid the words safe and unsafe, because
> 
> a) they are technical terms in the realm of high integrity programming
> b) they are unnecessarily emotive (who wants unsafe code?)

I agree, but term "unsafe" is less important then fact that developer 
will have only one gcc option to use in release mode. If he is doing 
something "special" (like math-related app) only _then_ he needs to 
learn and tune gcc options. Instead of O3_unsafe it can be O3_non_iso, 
O3_ni, O3ni ... whatever.

mirza