https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119014
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #17) > > (for -fexcess-precision=fast arguably it should be IMHO -1). > > 2 is more accurate. Note that -1 would not make GCC conforming with > -fexcess-precision=fast. -fexcess-precision=fast is not standard conforming, that is why -fexcess-precision=standard has been introduced (and made default for -std=c* modes). And on x86 -m32 in that mode not everything is using long double precision, it is pretty much about luck whether something can stay in the 387 stack registers (then it is using long double excess precision) or needs to be spilled out (then it has float/double/_Float16 precision). And constants aren't using excess precision. FLT_EVAL_METHOD -1 means that it is indeterminable. > > Anyway, if you don't believe -fexcess-precision= affects the FLT_EVAL_METHOD > > values, just look at the source: > > Then this is a bug. No.
