rjmccall added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:3159 +controlled with this pragma. +``#pragma clang fp allow_reassociation`` allows control over the reassociation +of floating point expressions. When enabled, this pragma allows the expression ---------------- sepavloff wrote: > I would say the previous name, `reassoc`, was more consistent. We do not use > `allow_contraction`. "contract" isn't a shortening, though, it's a verb. The idea is that a pragma is a directive to the compiler. So arguably the more consistent spelling would be something like `#pragma clang fp reassociate`. ================ Comment at: clang/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:3177 +Both floating point reassociation and floating point contraction can be +controlled with this pragma. +``#pragma clang fp reassoc`` allows control over the reassociation ---------------- Let's go ahead and word this as if arbitrary things will be controllable in the future. So: > Currently, the following things can be controlled by this pragma: ================ Comment at: clang/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:3191 option is identical to using ``#pragma STDC FP_CONTRACT(ON)`` and it allows fusion as specified the language standard. The ``fast`` option allows fusiong in cases when the language standard does not make this possible (e.g. across ---------------- Please fix this typo while you're here. ================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/LangOptions.h:186 + FPM_Fast }; ---------------- I'm not sure I think this fusion was an improvement; the net effect was to remove a few lines from this header and make a bunch of switches unnecessarily non-exhaustive. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D78827/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D78827 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
