On Jun 21, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Lang Hames <[email protected]> wrote:

> Should this flag, whatever it's eventually called, have a "never-form" mode 
> that over-rides FP_CONTRACT and prevents any FMA formation? That seems like 
> it could be useful, if only for debugging. FP_CONTRACT doesn't guarantee any 
> fusing, so a flag that disabled any fusing wouldn't violate FP_CONTRACT 
> semantics, it would just provide a baseline with no fusing carried out. This 
> is what I had in mind when I penned the comments that you referred to Hal.
> 
> In that case an alternative flag could be:
> 
> "-fform-fma={anywhere,standard,never}"

Sounds good to me.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to