From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A24CE384D189 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2023 22:25:22 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org A24CE384D189 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1679351122; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ge8fiGTx1fdsoR9hrTXMqBMGYU+bv+hVaTcqbXE30UY=; b=NON9AMiLxjfxuJn9k+WDZrhOWub8P3c5wpqgRKV/NpWoG4oP/NYUx0d/2pVXIcHJaBY6zL 4LP+Mzxugz33EpEW7FovKGiJ1BDrFajxIAM/iUKaexQVChijoNjY3/WpdlyISyVUUkQGXY YQVS/ipGHBzxT62jZJawguMfkc4T/zo= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-544-p8jbys7kPCiWZLUSMXRxdg-1; Mon, 20 Mar 2023 18:25:17 -0400 X-MC-Unique: p8jbys7kPCiWZLUSMXRxdg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E29E87B2A3; Mon, 20 Mar 2023 22:25:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.192.16]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AFBB40C20FA; Mon, 20 Mar 2023 22:25:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 32KMPDjI1192456 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 20 Mar 2023 23:25:13 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 32KMPCEp1190679; Mon, 20 Mar 2023 23:25:12 +0100 Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 23:25:11 +0100 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Qing Zhao Cc: Andrew Pinski , "richard.earnshaw@arm.com" , gcc Patches , Richard Sandiford Subject: Re: Should -ffp-contract=off the default on GCC? Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <6659A77B-DA2F-40A6-BDBD-E8B29B9E901D@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:05:57PM +0000, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote: > My question: is the above section the place in C standard “explicitly allows contractions”? If not, where it is in C standard? http://port70.net/%7Ensz/c/c99/n1256.html#6.5p8 http://port70.net/%7Ensz/c/c99/n1256.html#note78 http://port70.net/%7Ensz/c/c99/n1256.html#F.6 Jakub