From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-23934-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5330 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2002 11:06:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 5294 invoked by uid 71); 4 Nov 2002 11:06:03 -0000
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 03:06:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20021104110603.5276.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Bruce Allen <ballen@gravity.phys.uwm.edu>
Subject: Re: c/8395: gcc 2.95.4 and 3.2 generate wrong code for double on
 intel
Reply-To: Bruce Allen <ballen@gravity.phys.uwm.edu>
X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00148.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR c/8395; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Bruce Allen <ballen@gravity.phys.uwm.edu>
To: Marco Bernardo <bernardo@sti.uniurb.it>
Cc: Bruce Allen <ballen@aei.mpg.de>, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org,
       gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: c/8395: gcc 2.95.4 and 3.2 generate wrong code for double on
 intel
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 04:58:02 -0600 (CST)

 > 2. I hope we all agree on the fact that the output produced by
 >    a (sequential) C program is the same for a given input,
 >    regardless of the compilation options that are used.
 
 Absolutely false!
 
 C does not specify the order in which mathematical expressions are
 evaluated, unless the programmer makes these completely explicity.
 
 And indeed compiling with optimizations turned on can eliminate many
 subexpressions, cause compile-time evaluatiosn, register sorage etc, which
 can also change results.
 
 Bruce Allen