Jörg F. Wittenberger scripsit:
> A) gcc will still warn about about
> 'weakn' may be used uninitialized in this function
And rightly so. weakn is intialized at line 2888, which is within
the scope of the "if(C_enable_gcweak) {" beginning at line 2885 and
ending at line 2891. The problematic test, however, is at line 2961.
Consequently, if C_enable_gcweak is false, weakn will contain garbage.
That shouldn't affect what happens at 2691, since weakn should not be
examined if C_enable_gcweak is false, which is the gcc bug. Nevertheless,
the warning should be eliminated by initializing weakn to 0 in line
2655 where it is declared. Variables which are sometimes initialized
and sometimes not are usually bad coding style.
--
A: "Spiro conjectures Ex-Lax." John Cowan
Q: "What does Pat Nixon frost her cakes with?" [email protected]
--"Jeopardy" for generative semanticists http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
