[Bug middle-end/20968] spurious "may be used uninitialized" warning (conditional PHIs)

2017-12-15 Thread law at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20968 Bug 20968 depends on bug 36550, which changed state. Bug 36550 Summary: Wrong "may be used uninitialized" warning (conditional PHIs) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36550 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug middle-end/20968] spurious "may be used uninitialized" warning (conditional PHIs)

2013-11-18 Thread law at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20968 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug middle-end/20968] spurious "may be used uninitialized" warning (conditional PHIs)

2010-04-20 Thread davidxl at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from davidxl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 00:27 --- (In reply to comment #2) > Note this is not fully a regression but really a progression. > What is happening now is only partial optimizations is happen before the > warning to happen. > > >I was unable to reduce t

[Bug middle-end/20968] spurious "may be used uninitialized" warning (conditional PHIs)

2009-12-30 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-30 16:59 --- *** Bug 42145 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug middle-end/20968] spurious "may be used uninitialized" warning (conditional PHIs)

2009-02-07 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-07 16:27 --- This is just another case that would require conditional PHIs. I am not marking it as a duplicate of bug 36550, because this case is harder than then typical: if(q) p=1; something() if(q) use(p); Therefore, it may be