Richard Henderson wrote: > On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 12:04:04PM -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > >>I've never quite understood the necessity for performing trig operations >>on excessively large values, but perhaps my problem domain hasn't >>included such applications. > > > Whether you think it necessary or not, the ISO C functions allow > such arguments, and we're not allowed to break that without cause.
Then, as someone else said, why doesn't the compiler enforce -ansi and/or -pedantic by default? Or is ANSI purity only important in some cases, but not others? I do not and have not suggested changing the default behavior of the compiler, and *have* suggested that it is not pedantic enough about Standards. *This* discussion is about improving -funsafe-math-optimizations to make it more sensible and flexible. For a wide variety of applications, the hardware intrinsics provide both faster and more accurate results, when compared to the library functions. However, I may *not* want other transformations implied by -funsafe-math-optimizations. Therefore, it seems to me that GCC could cleanly and simply implement an option to use hardware intrinsics (or a highly-optimized but non-ANSI library) for those of us who want it. No changes to default optimizations, no breaking of existing code, just a new option (as in optional.) How does that hurt you or anyone else? It's not as if GCC doesn't have a few options already... ;) I (and others) also note other compilers do a fine job of handling these problems. ..Scott
