--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-17 09:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=17474)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17474action=view)
gcc44-pr39474.patch
I disagree. IMHO there is no reason why we should optimize these out at -O0.
We don't
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-17 10:03
---
It works for the gdb.python/python-template.exp test, thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39474
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-17 17:53 ---
Subject: Bug 39474
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 17 17:53:01 2009
New Revision: 144914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=144914
Log:
PR debug/39474
* tree-ssa-live.c
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-17 17:57 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-16 22:59 ---
Well, it doesn't even have a value assigned. So I consider this a valid
optimization for -O0. Does the variable have a location once you inintialize
it?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39474
