Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 19:46:27 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: optimization/10189: pentium4 breaks suns libm code for __ieee754_pow(double x, double y) Message-ID: <20030329034627.GC37614@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20030326220934.398c7455.Alexander@Leidinger.net> References: <20030326130118.8374.qmail@sources.redhat.com> <20030326220934.398c7455.Alexander@Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 10:09:34PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > And trust me, as long as gcc ships with a description of other > optimizations beneath "-O" there will be (clueless or smart... does it > really matter here?) people which will try those optimizations on > everything Not to mention bullshit ones like "-O9". I see that all the time. What do these poeple think they are buying with that????? GCC should stop accepting -O values higher than what does anything.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030329034627.GC37614>