https://github.com/AaronBallman commented:
> @AaronBallman what do you think about the warnings (and the rest of course)? > -fcomplex-arithmetic=full -ffast-math generates this warning: "use of nnan or > ninf flags in the presence of '-fcomplex-arithmetic=full' option". > -ffast-math -fcomplex-arithmetic=full generates this warning: "overriding > '-fcomplex-arithmetic=basic' option with '-fcomplex-arithmetic=full' > -ffast-math sets the range to "basic" and when "full" is met. the value of > range is overridden, hence the warning. Is it OK that the warnings are not > symmetrical? Should we generate the first warning also for the second case or > is it too redundant? I think the second diagnostic would be pretty confusing to users because it doesn't mention `-ffast-math` and the command line doesn't mention `-fcomplex-arithmetic-basic`. It might be tricky to improve this though. CC @MaskRay https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81514 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
