zahiraam marked an inline comment as done. zahiraam added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:410-412 +- The driver option ``-menable-unsafe-fp-math`` has been removed. Passing it, will +result in a hard error. To enable unsafe floating-point optimizations, the compiler +options ``-funsafe-math-optimizations`` and ``-ffast-math`` are used instead. ---------------- MaskRay wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > zahiraam wrote: > > > aaron.ballman wrote: > > > > Because we diagnose unknown driver flags as an error > > > > (https://godbolt.org/z/4xjzKh4Ej) and there's no deprecation period, I > > > > think we should put this under the potentially breaking changes > > > > section. In this case, I'm specifically worried about proprietary > > > > projects using the flag for optimization purposes (a lot of numerical > > > > analysis code is behind closed doors). > > > > > > > > CC @MaskRay just to make sure there's agreement (we're still trying to > > > > figure out what constitutes a breaking change we want to be loud about > > > > in terms of driver flags). > > > > > > > > Assuming Fangrui doesn't disagree, once this lands, please post an > > > > announcement about it into https://discourse.llvm.org/c/announce/46 > > > > with the `clang` and `potentially-breaking` tags (an example of such a > > > > post is: > > > > https://discourse.llvm.org/t/clang-16-notice-of-potentially-breaking-changes/65562/ > > > > though you wouldn't need all that lead-in text). > > > @aaron.ballman would it be worth adding a diagnostic for the option we > > > are removing? > > If we're going to deprecate rather than remove, sure. But I think we're > > okay removing, and I think the default error diagnostic behavior will be > > sufficient. > Since -menable-unsafe-fp-math was only accidentally exposed in 2020 and it's > clear not used in the wild, placing this under "Potentially Breaking Changes" > seems overkill to me (lengthy entries in release notes also discourage > readers). > > > The driver option ``-menable-unsafe-fp-math`` has been removed. Passing it, > > will result in a hard error. > > I think `Passing it, will result in a hard error. ` can be removed as the > removal clearly indicates that passing it is an error:) > > > the compiler options ``-funsafe-math-optimizations`` and ``-ffast-math`` > > are used instead. > > Use xxx or xxx instead. @MaskRay Thanks! I tend to agree about the "Potentially Breaking changes". CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D135097/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D135097 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
