On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 07:09:44PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote:

> Commit cbfd5e1c ("drop some obsolete "x = x" compiler warning hacks",
> 21-03-2013) removed a gcc hack that suppressed an "might be used
> uninitialized" warning issued by older versions of gcc.
> However, commit 3aa99df8 ('fast-import: clarify "inline" logic in
> file_change_m', 21-03-2013) addresses an (almost) identical issue
> (with very similar code), but includes additional code in it's
> resolution. The solution used by this commit, unlike that used by
> commit cbfd5e1c, also suppresses the -Wuninitialized warning on
> older versions of gcc.
> In order to suppress the warning (against the 'oe' symbol) in the
> note_change_n() function, we adopt the same solution used by commit
> 3aa99df8.

Yeah, they are essentially the same piece of code, so I don't mind this
change.  It is odd to me that gcc gets it right in one case but not the
other, but I think we are deep into the vagaries of the compiler's code
flow analysis here, and we cannot make too many assumptions.

Were you actually triggering this warning, and if so, on what version of
gcc? Or did the asymmetry just offend your sensibilities?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to