From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nick Ing-Simmons <nick@ing-simmons.net>
To: gdr@codesourcery.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, aoliva@redhat.com, tprince@computer.org, dewar@gnat.com, torvalds@transmeta.com, moshier@moshier.ne.mediaone.net, Joern Rennecke <amylaar@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in    combine)
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 07:12:00 -0000
Message-id: <20010803134127.16603.3@bactrian.ni-s.u-net.com>
References: <200107310443.f6V4hdh09169@phal.cambridge.redhat.com> <flpuah7l80.fsf@jambon.cmla.ens-cachan.fr>
X-SW-Source: 2001-08/msg00171.html

Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@codesourcery.com> writes:
>Joern Rennecke <amylaar@redhat.com> writes:
>
>| > That said, I don't mind about -fdubious-math as far as it is not the
>| > default, nor turned on at any level of optimization.
>| 
>| For a user, it's hard to guess or remember user that -fdubious-math
>| and -ffast-math are related.  How about -ffast-and-loose-math ?
>
>I was actually proposing to rename -ffast-math to -fdubious-math :-)
>but your proposal has also my support :-))

quick-and-dirty-math ?
 
>
>-- Gaby
-- 
Nick Ing-Simmons
http://www.ni-s.u-net.com/