those optimisations are available on the respective JITs.
I'd assume they aren't applied by default and/or without the programmer explicitly opting in to those altered semantics, though. Would you be able to show otherwise?
I don't see how changing targeted instruction sets is relevant here as the instructions you use is orthogonal to whether you assume floating point operations are associative.
Neither of those appear to say anything about treating floating point operations as associative nor reordering them as a standard optimization, let alone allowing the programmer to opt into such an optimization.
Comments
I'd assume they aren't applied by default and/or without the programmer explicitly opting in to those altered semantics, though. Would you be able to show otherwise?
I don't see how changing targeted instruction sets is relevant here as the instructions you use is orthogonal to whether you assume floating point operations are associative.
I pasted the links for a reason.
Neither of those appear to say anything about treating floating point operations as associative nor reordering them as a standard optimization, let alone allowing the programmer to opt into such an optimization.