http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50904
--- Comment #31 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-12-02 16:32:52 UTC --- On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50904 > > --- Comment #30 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-12-02 > 16:29:46 UTC --- > (In reply to comment #29) > > And for the sake of completeness the evaluation of sub above and > > x = (x + 2.d0**52) - 2.d0**52 > > should behave consistently if I read your Fortran standard > > quotations correctly. > > Well, it kind of does, only when mixing (in GCC) -funsafe-math-optimizations > with -fprotect-parens or (in ifort) "-assume protect_parens" with a non-strict > -fp-model, you get a different results: 1.0 with the () version and 1.3 with > the 'tmp' version. Ok, which is, I suppose, a bug in both compilers. Richard.
