------- Comment #11 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-31 20:53 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > I am pointing out a case where it does not warn (and it seems to me that it
> > should); what is your point?
>
> My point is that you should open a different bug that says we should warn
> about
> that case with -O0 rather than warning that -Wuninitialized needs -O.
The manual says:
"Because these warnings depend on optimization, the exact variables or elements
for which there are warnings will depend on the precise optimization options
and version of GCC used."
It is infeasible to perform expensive analysis at -O0, so there is little point
to open such a bug report. It might be possible to have some fast dataflow
analysis at -O0 to detect this case but I am pretty sure that no existing GCC
developer is going to work on this. So unless you are planning to work on this
yourself (or pay someone to do it), don't expect any fix soon. But opening bug
reports is free, so go for it if you wish.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
Severity|normal |critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45468
