From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14714 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2003 14:31:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 14445 invoked by uid 48); 13 Jun 2003 14:31:04 -0000 Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 14:31:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030613143104.14442.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "bosch@gcc.gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20021116025602.8606.166255@bugs.debian.org> References: <20021116025602.8606.166255@bugs.debian.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/8606] GNAT floating point optimization bug X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg01578.txt.bz2 List-Id: PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8606 bosch@gcc.gnu.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |INVALID ------- Additional Comments From bosch@gcc.gnu.org 2003-06-13 14:31 ------- As described earlier, varying accuracy on x86 depending on optimization is not a bug. A lot has been written about this over the years. Search the archives if you're interested. There is nothing to fix here.