https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97398
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Windl ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #2)
> would this go under one of the existing -Wunused flags, or a new one?
I think it's a case of being an unused value set to a variable in general, but
more
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 49360
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49360=edit
Simple test c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87806
--- Comment #8 from Ulrich Windl ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> I don't think there are any, only for local typedefs. That's already enabled
> by -Wall so I assumed this was a request to add a new warning *and* enable
> it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87806
--- Comment #7 from Ulrich Windl ---
(In reply to Tavian Barnes from comment #4)
> Perhaps this is reasonable for types that are defined in the file itself,
> not in an included header?
That's what I was thinking about. However it seems the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87806
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Windl ---
This is an enhancement request (cant't set it in Bugzilla)
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de
Target Milestone: ---
Gcc with -Wall warns about unused static and local variables for a long time,
but it does not warn about unused typedefs
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de
I wrote a simple test code for bitset that the default optimization complete
removes. Only -O0 keept the code. However the default code should output. Thus
I consider the optimization bad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61531
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Windl Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de ---
Exact version of g++ is that of SLES11 SP3 for x86_64 (gcc-c++-4.3-62.198).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61531
--- Comment #2 from Ulrich Windl Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de ---
Created attachment 32948
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32948action=edit
Preprocessed source (gzip compressed)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61531
--- Comment #3 from Ulrich Windl Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de ---
Here's (for completeness) the code when I use -O0:
~/src/C++/bitsettest make
g++ -Wall -Wextra -Wshadow -O0 -g --save-temps-c -o bstest.o bstest.cc
bstest.cc:4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61531
--- Comment #6 from Ulrich Windl Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
rpm -q gcc43-c++
gcc43-c++-4.3.4_20091019-0.22.17
rpm -q --changelog gcc43-c++ | head
* Thu Nov 10 2011 rguent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61531
Ulrich Windl Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de
I had made a programming error that I could not find with
-fstack-protector-all, but I think it should have helped:
My bug was related to pthread_join() when the thread return parameter received
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Ulrich.Windl at rz dot uni-regensburg.de
It seems stringification for __GNUC__ and other related numbers does not
work:
Using #__GNUC__ produces # 4 as output, not the expected ``4''.
I tried something like
#define GCC_VERSION
14 matches
Mail list logo
