On 3 September 2016 at 02:11, Eric Gallager <eg...@gwmail.gwu.edu> wrote: > On 9/2/16, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopeziba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 3 Sep 2016 12:56 a.m., "Eric Gallager" <eg...@gwmail.gwu.edu> wrote: >>> I tried that but it doesn't look like it produced any dumpfiles... >> >> I often use -fdump-tree-all-all-lineno >> > > > That produced a lot of files; I'm attaching a tarball of all of them > because I don't know which is the correct one...
None of them. Are you sure you were using at least -O2 and -Wall ? In any case, it is not worth it to waste your time on this further: * Warnings in stage1 don't matter: https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#stage1warnings * Wrong (missing or bogus) uninitialized warnings only present in old compilers will not get fixed. They are rarely a regression nor easy to fix. * Large testcases for wrong uninitialized warnings are not worth investigating except if they show a regression in trunk. Otherwise, there are so many known issues with Wuninitialized that the analysis will certainly be closed as a duplicate and not help at all towards a possible fix. * If you wish to learn about Wuninitialized, it is better to start with one of the well-known and already analyzed bug reports than with a large testcase. Major problems are described here: https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Better_Uninitialized_Warnings#Current_Situation However, those are likely among the hardest problems to solve in GCC, so you may want to check for easyhacks. Cheers, Manuel.