[Bug tree-optimization/100417] False positive -Wmaybe-uninitalized with malloc.

2021-05-10 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100417 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jochen447 at concept dot de --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/100417] False positive -Wmaybe-uninitalized with malloc.

2021-05-05 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100417 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug tree-optimization/100417] False positive -Wmaybe-uninitalized with malloc.

2021-05-05 Thread jkb at sanger dot ac.uk via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100417 --- Comment #3 from jkb at sanger dot ac.uk --- I'd definitely be in favour of John's rewording of the warning - "data pointed to by ...". This definitely led us up the garden path for a while. While I agree the code could have been written dif

[Bug tree-optimization/100417] False positive -Wmaybe-uninitalized with malloc.

2021-05-04 Thread jmarshall at hey dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100417 --- Comment #2 from John Marshall --- See also https://github.com/samtools/htslib/pull/1275#issuecomment-831799708 (onwards) and https://github.com/samtools/htslib/pull/1280 for the initial observation of this in James's original code. The diagn

[Bug tree-optimization/100417] False positive -Wmaybe-uninitalized with malloc.

2021-05-04 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100417 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Blocks|