[Bug tree-optimization/30334] [meta-bug] Request for -Wundefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30334 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|gdr at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Status|ASSIGNED|NEW --- Comment #19 from Andrew Pinski --- GDR has not been active in GCC development for years now.
[Bug tree-optimization/30334] [meta-bug] Request for -Wundefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30334 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #18 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #17) > I agree with the goal of detecting undefined behavior but I don't think a > catchall warning option like -Wundefined would be very helpful. Not all > kinds of undefined behavior are of the same severity so providing a single > option for all of it would make it hard to clean up code with more than just > a handful of instances of it. Especially for late warnings that are > susceptible to false positives, being able to control them in a targeted way > is important. > > The trend over the last years has been toward providing granular warning > options to control the detection of specific/related kinds of problems, like > -Warray-bounds, or -Wuninitialized. and even those could be more granular; for -Warray-bounds clang has a separate -Warray-bounds-pointer-arithmetic (bug 81172), while for -Wuninitialized, gcc has a separate -Wmaybe-uninitialized (and, with the static analyzer, -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value), while clang has a separate -Wsometimes-uninitialized and -Wconditional-uninitialized
[Bug tree-optimization/30334] [meta-bug] Request for -Wundefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30334 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor --- I agree with the goal of detecting undefined behavior but I don't think a catchall warning option like -Wundefined would be very helpful. Not all kinds of undefined behavior are of the same severity so providing a single option for all of it would make it hard to clean up code with more than just a handful of instances of it. Especially for late warnings that are susceptible to false positives, being able to control them in a targeted way is important. The trend over the last years has been toward providing granular warning options to control the detection of specific/related kinds of problems, like -Warray-bounds, or -Wuninitialized.
[Bug tree-optimization/30334] [meta-bug] Request for -Wundefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30334 Bug 30334 depends on bug 81172, which changed state. Bug 81172 Summary: Expected new warning option -Warray-bounds-pointer-arithmetic https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81172 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug tree-optimization/30334] [meta-bug] Request for -Wundefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30334 Bug 30334 depends on bug 29465, which changed state. Bug 29465 Summary: warning for overlapping memcpy() https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29465 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
