From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 767083858C53; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 19:43:28 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 767083858C53
From: "dcb314 at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/105278] no warning for precise literals compared with floats
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 19:43:28 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-105278-4-iarWq2DI8E@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-105278-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-105278-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 19:43:28 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105278

--- Comment #4 from David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> (In reply to David Binderman from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1)
> > > -Wfloat-equal gets you a warning, as does -Wdouble-promotion:
> >=20
> > Thanks for that. This looks like another case where an obscure flag
> > really ought to be in -Wall or at least -Wextra.
> >=20
> > I'll be adding it into my local compiler.
>=20
> Which one of them specifically do you want as part of -Wall or -Wextra?
> Because the latter is listed explicitly in some documentation somewhere as
> an example of a flag that would be bad to include in -Wall or -Wextra.

Sorry, I should have been more clear -Wfloat-equal. I haven't looked into
the pros and cons of -Wdouble-promotion.=20

If you've got some spare time to pin down "some documentation somewhere",
then that would be appreciated.=