--- Comment #16 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-27 18:37 ---
Subject: Bug 32102
Author: manu
Date: Sun Jan 27 18:36:59 2008
New Revision: 131887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=131887
Log:
2008-01-27 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #17 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-27 18:39 ---
Fixed in GCC 4.2.3
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-22 14:12 ---
Subject: Bug 32102
Author: manu
Date: Tue Jan 22 14:11:44 2008
New Revision: 131720
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=131720
Log:
2008-01-22 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #13 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-22 14:19 ---
Subject: Bug 32102
Author: manu
Date: Tue Jan 22 14:19:01 2008
New Revision: 131722
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=131722
Log:
Missed testcases in earlier commit.
2008-01-22 Manuel
--- Comment #14 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-22 14:22 ---
When you try to do things faster, you end up taking more time.
Anyway, fixed for GCC 4.3.
Ian,
do you think this should/could be backported to GCC 4.2 or should we just close
it as fixed?
--
manu at gcc dot
--- Comment #15 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-23 05:21 ---
I would be in favor of backporting to the gcc 4.2 branch. The option is new in
gcc 4.2, and this will make it less confusing to use.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
--- Comment #10 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-21 20:40 ---
This test case will give a warning with mainline with -Wstrict-overflow (aka
-Wstrict-overflow=2) but not with -Wall (which implies -Wstrict-overflow=1).
void Alpha();
void Beta() {
int i;
for (i = 1; i 0; i += i)
--- Comment #11 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-21 20:54 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
This test case will give a warning with mainline with -Wstrict-overflow (aka
-Wstrict-overflow=2) but not with -Wall (which implies -Wstrict-overflow=1).
I think that testcase is
--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-20 13:38 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
I think that having -Wall clobber -Wstrict-overflow in this way is confusing.
This isn't reversing the setting of the option, it's changing its level.
Ian, should the above testcase
--- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-21 01:10 ---
*** Bug 34841 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 01:40 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Your fix looks quite obvious, could you send it to gcc-patches so we can fix
this before the freeze? Thanks for the quick fix btw.
That fix is too simple. It doesn't handle
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 19:02 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
I think then -Wall shouldn't enable -Wstrict-overflow at all. Because current
situation is counter intuitive.
This a bug. A quick fix is:
Index: gcc/c-opts.c
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 18:44 ---
*** Bug 34843 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 18:46
---
I think then -Wall shouldn't enable -Wstrict-overflow at all. Because current
situation is counter intuitive.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
--- Comment #6 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 19:11
---
Manu,
Your fix looks quite obvious, could you send it to gcc-patches so we can fix
this before the freeze? Thanks for the quick fix btw.
Regards,
ismail
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
--- Comment #2 from ian at airs dot com 2007-05-29 13:48 ---
I think that having -Wall clobber -Wstrict-overflow in this way is confusing.
This isn't reversing the setting of the option, it's changing its level.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-27 03:45 ---
I don't think this is a bug, -Wall enable -Wstrict-overflow=1 so you have
-Wstrict-overflow=2 -Wstrict-overflow=1 (-Wstrict-overflow is the same as
-Wstrict-overflow=2). This is just like any other option like
17 matches
Mail list logo
