================
@@ -2842,9 +2862,8 @@ static void RenderFloatingPointOptions(const ToolChain
&TC, const Driver &D,
<< Args.MakeArgString("-ffp-model=" + FPModel)
<< Args.MakeArgString("-ffp-model=" + Val);
if (Val.equals("fast")) {
- optID = options::OPT_ffast_math;
FPModel = Val;
- FPContract = "fast";
+ applyFastMath();
----------------
andykaylor wrote:
I just re-read you comment, and I think I see the confusion now. The previous
code was not easy to follow. We were changing the value of optID here, so when
we finished with this switch statement execution would continue on to the
switch statement below where the "whole pile of flags" was being set by the
OPT_ffast_math handler. Now I'm not changing the value of optID here and
instead calling the lambda to set the pile of flags. In a future revision I'd
like to add a parameter to the lambda to indicate that I want slightly less
aggressive fast math settings.
I started out with a change that chained all the OPT_ffast_math,
OPT_fno_fast_math, OPT_funsafe_math_optimizations, and
OPT_fno_unsafe_math_optimizations into a pair of nested lambdas with a
parameter for positive and negative versions, but that got way too convoluted
to handle all the variations needed to make it NFC. I think that pointed to
some things we're doing wrong, but I'll address those separately to keep the
history clean. This seemed like a manageable place to start.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81173
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
