[Bug other/42540] c++ error message [vtable undefined] is unhelpful

2022-08-25 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42540 --- Comment #24 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- For completeness, this is what LLD says: ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: vtable for A >>> referenced by example.cpp:7 >>> /tmp/example-5d8b98.o:(A::A()) >>> the vtable symbol may be

[Bug other/42540] c++ error message [vtable undefined] is unhelpful

2022-08-25 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42540 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jyasskin at gmail dot com |unassigned at gcc dot

[Bug middle-end/323] optimized code gives strange floating point results

2020-02-07 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323 --- Comment #216 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #215) > According to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_status > the possible status are UNCONFIRMED, CONFIRMED and IN_PROGRESS. I think

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning (virtual PHI with MEM)

2018-09-13 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|taking address of a var |taking address of a var

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning

2018-09-13 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jimfr06 at gmail dot com ---

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning

2018-09-10 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning

2017-11-07 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||arnd at linaro dot org ---

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning

2017-03-03 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 --- Comment #32 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #31) > In any case, no warnings are generated. So, the problem here is not related > to whether the address of j is taken, but to something else. With a

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning

2017-03-02 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 --- Comment #30 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #29) > What remains seems to be complaining that > > int i; > foo (); > > doesn't warn. And we have another bug that > > int i; > foo (); > ... =

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning

2015-02-23 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tisaac

[Bug middle-end/323] optimized code gives strange floating point results

2014-12-30 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug middle-end/323] optimized code gives strange floating point results

2014-12-30 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https

[Bug middle-end/323] optimized code gives strange floating point results

2014-12-30 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323 --- Comment #198 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #197) (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #196) Also, the official FAQ for this (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#nonbugs_general

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning

2013-11-21 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 --- Comment #25 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #23) BTW, I suppose that in this test, -Wuninitialized should be changed to -Wuninitialized -Wmaybe-uninitialized in case

[Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning

2013-11-21 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 --- Comment #27 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #26) (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #25) I don't see any reason for -Wuninitialized to not enable -Wmaybe

[Bug middle-end/19430] V_MAY_DEF (taking address of var) causes missing uninitialized warning

2013-11-20 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 --- Comment #19 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #18) This seems to be fixed in the trunk. Is there an XPASS for gcc.dg/uninit-pr19430.c ? Also, the testcase from bug 42079? -- You

[Bug middle-end/19430] V_MAY_DEF (taking address of var) causes missing uninitialized warning

2013-11-20 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 --- Comment #20 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #19) (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #18) This seems to be fixed in the trunk. Is there an XPASS for gcc.dg/uninit

[Bug middle-end/19430] V_MAY_DEF (taking address of var) causes missing uninitialized warning

2013-11-20 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430 --- Comment #21 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- $ ~/test1/205036M/build/gcc/cc1 -O1 -Wuninitialized test.c -fdump-tree-all-all-lineno $ cat test.c.139t.uninit1 foo (intD.6 iD.1789) { intD.6 jD.1792; intD.6 _5; intD.6

[Bug c++/7302] -Wnon-virtual-dtor should't complain of protected dtor

2011-06-02 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7302 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|mueller at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc

[Bug c++/7302] -Wnon-virtual-dtor should't complain of protected dtor

2011-06-02 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7302 --- Comment #28 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-02 21:46:13 UTC --- (In reply to comment #26) I've posted a patch to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg00191.html which gives this for the code in comment 25

[Bug other/42540] c++ error message [vtable undefined] is unhelpful

2011-03-17 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42540 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||46542