--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-08 13:28 ---
I am going to close this as FIXED, since it cannot be reproduced anymore. If
anyone manages to reproduce it in GCC 4.5, please reopen.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-18 17:19
---
Today I can't reproduce it neither with mainline nor with 4_4-branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40156
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-18 16:30 ---
This is marked as a 4.4 regression. Does it happen in trunk?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40156
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-18 16:28 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> It is an uninitialized use in an exception handler.
Is it an explicit exception handler? Or a compiler-generated?
In any case, it looks like the code is actually executed, so it may well be
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Priority|P3 |P2
http:
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40156
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-15 09:17 ---
It is an uninitialized use in an exception handler.
;; basic block 132, loop depth 0, count 0
;; prev block 131, next block 133
;; pred: 131 (ab,eh,exec)
;; succ: 135 [100.0%] (fallthru,exec)
:
save_fil
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-15 09:11 ---
Does it happen on trunk?
The testcase is too big.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-15 09:02
---
Definitely bogus, maybe we already have something open about this issue, CC-ing
Richard, to be sure...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
