------- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-06-27 13:50 ------- Hmm, sort of. The call of g(i) also warns with "is used", although I think it might deserve only a "may be used". But anyway I think that this nevertheless has different causes. It's not the call creating the problem, but the copy itself. On could for instance delete the call and instead make 'testarray' volatile (so that the copy is not optimized away). This would still warn, IMHO incorrectly. What's even stranger is, that if I add a call "forget(testvar)" then the warning vanishes. I.e. like so: ------------------------------------- int main() { struct testme volatile testarray[1]; struct testme testvar; testvar.testval = 0; testarray[0] = testvar; forget (testvar); return 0; } ------------------------------------- So this shows that not the call on a partly initialized struct is the problem (because that is still the case with the above), but something in SRA dealing with the copy. If one removes the call to forget above the warning will return (note the added volatile) on the copy.
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22197