http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53134
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> 2012-04-27 10:26:22 UTC --- See also what I said in <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00105.html>: The option naming leaves open the possibility of other options such as "none" if someone wishes to implement them. ("none" would involve the compiler doing mode switching and adding code to deal with extra range and double rounding of subnormals. There could also be an option to have extra range but not precision, again with the compiler inserting mode switches as needed.) I am however doubtful of the use of such options; this patch deals with a major area where -std=c99 fails to implement standard semantics in default x86 configurations, but I'd expect people wanting particular semantics beyond a predictable version of C99 would use SSE.
