I feel we are going in circles, but about this:
jrtc27:
Just because GCC, and possibly other compilers, has, and refuses to remove, dangerous UX doesn’t mean we need to replicate it.
I would like to ask again and again why this means we need to deprecate with the intend to remove the option? Why can’t we emit a warning/diagnostic? I am really hoping for an answer here, which is why I split this off in:
I am forking this off from the RFC that discusses and implemented the deprecation of Ofast because:
that RFC has 100+ messages now and discusses various things at the same time,
I have left questions about the approach that are not being answered, so I want to focus on that here.
The original problem description in the original RFC was: Ofast is a footgun and users don’t understand fast math. The solution is to deprecate and remove Ofast in 2 years to protect users from themselves.
My questi…