Ahhh, ok. Good too know.

I think also it is not of high priority ;-)

Greets

Patrick

Am 10.12.2020 um 16:26 schrieb David Brown:
> On 10/12/2020 16:10, webmaster wrote:
> 
> (As a general rule, you'll get more useful responses if you use your
> name in your posts.  It's common courtesy.)
> 
> 
>> Is it possible to request such feature?
>>
> 
> Of course you can file a request for it.  Go to the gcc bugzilla site:
> 
> <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
> 
> First, search thoroughly to see if it is already requested - obvious
> duplicate requests just waste developers' time.  If you find a
> duplicate, add a comment and put yourself on the cc list.  If you don't
> find a duplicate, file it as a new bug.
> 
> Given the replies on this list from gcc developers, I would not hold my
> breath waiting for this feature.  It is unlikely to be implemented
> unless the relevant compiler passes are re-organised in some way, or
> extra information is tracked.  So I don't think it will be a priority.
> 
> However, it's always good to track these things - and if many people
> want a particular feature, it can't harm its chances of getting done
> eventually.
> 
> mvh.,
> 
> David
> 
> 
>> Am 09.12.2020 um 16:45 schrieb webmaster:
>>> I have the following Code C\C++:
>>>
>>> static int foo = 0;
>>>
>>> static void bar(void)
>>> {
>>>     foo = 1;
>>> }
>>>
>>> Here it is clear for the compiler that the variable foo can only be
>>> accessed from the same modul and not from ther modules. From the
>>> explanations before I understand that the variable is removed due to
>>> optimization. But I do not understand why GCC does not throws a warning.
>>>
>>> >From my point of view it is responsibility of the developer to remove
>>> the unused variable.
>>>
>>
>>

-- 
___      _ _    _   _ _      __           _       _      _      _
 |_ _|  __| (_)__| | (_) |_   / _|___ _ _  | |_ ___| |_   | |_  _| |___
  | |  / _` | / _` | | |  _| |  _/ _ \ '_| |  _/ -_) ' \  | | || | |_ /
 |___| \__,_|_\__,_| |_|\__| |_| \___/_|    \__\___|_||_| |_|\_,_|_/__|

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
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=Med3
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

Reply via email to