Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
> That is a serious compiler bug which you should file with your
> distro forthwith.
I distilled it down to the simplest case I could find which failed
to produce the warning; attached. Do you agree that it is a
compiler bug that this generates no warning?
Compile lines used:
gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels
-Wmissing-format-attribute -Wformat-security -fno-strict-aliasing
-fwrapv -fexcess-precision=standard -g -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o
warning_test.o warning_test.c -MMD -MP
clang -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels
-Wmissing-format-attribute -Wformat-security -fno-strict-aliasing
-fwrapv -g -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o warning_test.o warning_test.c -MMD
-MP
It is probably significant that if I simplify the while loop
condition to just use one variable I do get the warning.
> It definitely does show up with what I'm using:
> gcc (GCC) 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-3)
The warning shows up, or the bug does?
> It might be worth trawling the buildfarm records to see which
> compilers did or didn't warn before.
I'll get this filed first with the version I'm using, then look
around to see if there is anything else to report.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
int test_warnings(int x, int y, int z);
int
test_warnings(int x, int y, int z)
{
int i;
switch (x)
{
case 1:
if (y != z)
{
i = (y < z) ? -1 : 1;
}
break;
case 2:
if (y != z)
{
i = (y < z) ? -1 : 1;
}
break;
default:
return 0;
}
return i;
}
--
Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
