[Bug c++/84604] False positive "may be used uninitialized in this function" due to variable initialization eliminated as dead code

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84604

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |INVALID

--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener  ---
.

[Bug c++/84604] False positive "may be used uninitialized in this function" due to variable initialization eliminated as dead code

[cas43 at cs dot stanford.edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84604

--- Comment #2 from Craig Schroeder  ---
I was under the impression I was allowed to call the destructor just like any
other function.  On further investigation, this is undefined behavior, so this
bug report is invalid.

[Bug c++/84604] False positive "may be used uninitialized in this function" due to variable initialization eliminated as dead code

[glisse at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84604

--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse  ---
(In reply to Craig Schroeder from comment #0)
> this->~S();
> a=b+2;

What do you expect this to do? You destruct the object, then access its member
b...