On 25/02/2013 22:32, Rich Freeman wrote: > That isn't the same as saying that we can just break it in cases where > it actually is appropriate. Calculating scroll bar movement is > exactly the sort of thing that this flag was actually designed for - > you don't care if it is off by 1/100th of a pixel.
Rich.. please... don't try to talk about things you don't understand. If Chromium is not building *by itself* on -ffast-math, we should *not* support building it with it. Full stop. It's not that adding -ffast-math loses the 1/100th precision on a scroll bar pixel: it has a truckload of changes to the whole mathematics in the code, which _among other things_ will break that scrollbar, because the calculation used to display it add up to a huge difference. So no, I don't care if -ffast-math "breaks" in the sense that stuff that does not build with -ffast-math to begin with work even less with the new version — I would be wondering about it if it broke stuff that already is designed to rely on it, but even in that case, it's hard to actually say that it "broke", it's just "different". -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/