[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2022-06-10 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 --- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou --- > Some comments on the topic are in PR104702 Indeed, thanks for the pointer. I'll probably submit my fixlet though because the current behavior of gimple_set_location is clearly broken.

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2022-06-10 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- Some comments on the topic are in PR104702

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2022-06-09 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2021-06-28 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2021-06-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:40c64c9ea565230817f08b5e66a30a1c94ec880c commit r12-1861-g40c64c9ea565230817f08b5e66a30a1c94ec880c Author: Martin Sebor Date: Mon

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2021-05-24 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2021-04-29 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2019-02-03 00:00:00 |2021-4-29 Status|NEW

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2019-02-03 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2016-08-12 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > I had plans to turn TREE_NO_WARNING/gimple_no_warning_p into on the side > hashmap which would map trees or gimple stmts to bitmaps of OPT_W* flags > that

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2016-08-12 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 --- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > I wonder if we can somehow "annotate" locations with NO_WARNING > (warning-option) Wouldn't that be equivalent to internally generating a #pragma GCC

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2016-08-12 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/74765] missing uninitialized warning (parenthesis, TREE_NO_WARNING abuse)

2016-08-12 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74765 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- I wonder if we can somehow "annotate" locations with NO_WARNING (warning-option) instead of relying on bits on tree nodes / stmts. Maybe even as simple as a global hash_map that could