[Bug c++/49409] some possible new warnings for strange code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49409 David Binderman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from David Binderman --- Four out of five cases solved is good enough, in my view.
[Bug c++/49409] some possible new warnings for strange code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49409 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||polacek at redhat dot com --- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com --- Maybe Marek is interested (beyond -Wtautological-compare)
[Bug c++/49409] some possible new warnings for strange code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49409 Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- With -Wall -Wlogical-op we warn for all the cases except if ((i - i) 10) and I'm not sure if we really want a warning for this case.
[Bug c++/49409] some possible new warnings for strange code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49409 --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- -Wtautological-compare has been added to GCC 6. -Wlogical-op is older, but the part of it that warns about i i is new and has only been added to GCC 6. I agree about closing the bug now, BTW.
[Bug c++/49409] some possible new warnings for strange code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49409 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, ||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com --- Marek, could you please add to the audit trail which warnings work in which version of GCC? Thanks in advance! About the remaining case, I would be tempted to close the bug or maybe we could first ask other maintainers...
[Bug c++/49409] some possible new warnings for strange code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49409 --- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- I meant agree with closing.
[Bug c++/49409] some possible new warnings for strange code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49409 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2011.06.15 10:03:26 Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-15 10:03:26 UTC --- confirmed.
[Bug c++/49409] some possible new warnings for strange code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49409 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-14 22:34:34 UTC --- some warnings would seem sensible to me I tried clang++ which only warns about the first two, via -Wtautological-compare
