http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #71 from Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com ---
Hey guys, this year will be the 10 year anniversary of this bug. We should
order cake!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17838
--- Comment #10 from Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2011-11-15
14:20:07 UTC ---
Another update ... We've just profiled our crypto library and across the board
[cipher, hashes, PK functions like RSA/ECC] GCC is a complete loser
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17838
--- Comment #9 from Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2011-11-10
19:28:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #6)
Created attachment 25751 [details]
Another test case
Another example using
gcc version
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17838
Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tstdenis
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17838
--- Comment #6 from Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2011-11-08
14:17:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 25751
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25751
Another test case
Another example using
gcc version 4.6.1 20110908
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #43 from Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-12-09
15:25:25 UTC ---
Maybe it's high time someone address this shortcoming as opposed to adding
additional language front ends. If you can't even get the core ones right
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #46 from Tom St Denis tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-12-09
17:03:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #44)
(In reply to comment #43)
Maybe it's high time someone address this shortcoming as opposed to adding
additional language
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tstdenis at elliptictech dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42884
--- Comment #2 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 14:01
---
Here's the file [I'm getting an internal error when submitting a file]
---warning.c---
#define NULL ((void *)0)
#define OK 0
typedef struct { void *a; } state;
int init(int, state *);
int done(unsigned char
--- Comment #3 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 14:02
---
(In reply to comment #1)
No attachment. Moreover, please try also a more recent release, in the 4.4.x
series.
No warning from GCC 4.4.0 when using '-Wall -W -O3'.
--
tstdenis at elliptictech dot com
--- Comment #5 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 14:08
---
(In reply to comment #4)
Yes. I'm pretty sure we have duplicates in Bugzilla. Anyway, I just tested two
other high quality compilers and they don't warn either. I don't think we can
reach zero negatives
--- Comment #7 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 14:28
---
(In reply to comment #6)
I'm restating my point: indeed, the variable can be used uninitialized. This
is
not at issue. My point is that, depending on the way the compiler is
internally
organized, etc, you
--- Comment #9 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 15:43
---
(In reply to comment #8)
Is 'coverity' a compiler? I don't think so. Do you have actual examples of
*compilers* which, everything taken into account, decided to make sure this
case is worth warning?
I wonder
--- Comment #11 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 15:57
---
(In reply to comment #10)
To be clear: nobody closed this bug, ever. And talking about apathy is plain
offensive, or maybe you are just ignorant of the trade-offs involved in this
area.
I didn't say you did
--- Comment #13 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 16:05
---
(In reply to comment #12)
You are apathetic, and your mother and son.
`
Apathy: noun, a lack of enthusiasm or emotion.
Being dismissive of the bug because other compilers don't detect it either is
apathetic
--- Comment #15 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 16:22
---
(In reply to comment #14)
As diglen has its address taken and we do not warn about uninitialized use
of memory we do not warn.
I get that the compiler can't track if an external function actually
--- Comment #17 from tstdenis at elliptictech dot com 2010-01-27 17:55
---
(In reply to comment #16)
No, it's an implementation detail. Uninitialized variable use tracking
works with detecting uses of SSA name default definitions. Memory
is not in SSA form so this mechanism does
17 matches
Mail list logo
