--- Comment #20 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-01 17:05 ---
See comment 17 and comment 19. This is fixed by chance by CCP, so not worth to
keep it open.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-22 17:48 ---
The warning is not emitted any more in GCC 4.1.2 and I am fairly sure that this
case is covered by gcc.dg/uninit-5.c and gcc.dg/uninit-9.c, so I am tempted to
close this as fixed.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #18 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-22 18:07 ---
so I am tempted to close this as fixed.
At least PR 27289 and PR 29479 (marked as duplicate of this PR) seem still to
show the bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5035
--- Comment #19 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-22 18:47 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
so I am tempted to close this as fixed.
At least PR 27289 and PR 29479 (marked as duplicate of this PR) seem still to
show the bug.
They shouldn't be duplicates then. Here, the
--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 20:05
---
*** Bug 31688 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-13 07:31
---
*** Bug 30086 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-13 15:22
---
Some year we'll have to use the control dependence graph to see if all the
conditions are the same :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5035
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-24 17:06
---
*** Bug 27289 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5035
--- Comment #10 from trick at icculus dot org 2005-12-22 10:38 ---
Maybe you could add a new variable attribute so that these warnings could at
least be avoided in cases where the coder knows the code is correct ?
Something like:
int x __attribute__((__notuninited__));
if (y) x = 0;
On Dec 22, 2005, at 5:38 AM, trick at icculus dot org wrote:
--- Comment #10 from trick at icculus dot org 2005-12-22 10:38
---
Maybe you could add a new variable attribute so that these warnings
could at
least be avoided in cases where the coder knows the code is correct ?
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-22 14:22
---
Subject: Re: Incorrectly produces '`var' might be used uninitialized in this
function'
On Dec 22, 2005, at 5:38 AM, trick at icculus dot org wrote:
--- Comment #10 from trick at icculus dot org
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-26 16:39 ---
Actually this is easy to find a testcase where we do warn (turning off DOM is
an easy example)
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-26 16:39 ---
*** Bug 21750 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from law at redhat dot com 2005-11-08 17:03 ---
The SSA optimizers clean this testcase enough to no longer emit a bogus
uninitialized warning. It is (of course) possible to create more complex tests
which would still generate bogus uninitialized warnings.
--
law at
--
law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5035
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 20:20
---
*** Bug 21357 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|SUSPENDED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-17
23:13 ---
*** Bug 19062 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-12-17
23:35 ---
Some discussion about how this warning interacts with the tree-ssa framework
can be found here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-12/msg00681.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01309.html
--
21 matches
Mail list logo
