[Bug c/111693] Online manual mentions -Wuse-after-free but does not document it further

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111693 Jonathan Leffler changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/111693] Online manual mentions -Wuse-after-free but does not document it further

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111693 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Leffler --- The link https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-13.2.0/gcc/C_002b_002b-Dialect-Options.html#index-Wuse-after-free is to the "Options Controlling C++ Dialect". I was using the C compiler, not the C++

[Bug c/111693] Online manual mentions -Wuse-after-free but does not document it further

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111693 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Leffler --- The link https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-13.2.0/gcc/C_002b_002b-Dialect-Options.html#index-Wuse-after-free is to the "Options Controlling C++ Dialect". I was using the C compiler, not the C++

[Bug c/111695] Spurious -Wuse-after-free when managing two arrays in parallel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111695 Jonathan Leffler changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #56047|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c/111695] Spurious -Wuse-after-free when managing two arrays in parallel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111695 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Leffler --- Created attachment 56050 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56050=edit gcc-bug-4.c — Variation 4 (one array — does not generate -Wuse-after-free warnings)

[Bug c/111695] Spurious -Wuse-after-free when managing two arrays in parallel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111695 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Leffler --- Created attachment 56049 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56049=edit gcc-bug-3.c — Variation 3 (one array: does not generate -Wuse-after-free warnings)

[Bug c/111695] Spurious -Wuse-after-free when managing two arrays in parallel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111695 Jonathan Leffler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com

[Bug c/111695] New: Spurious -Wuse-after-free when managing two arrays in parallel

Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 56047 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56047=edit Variation 1 (two arrays in paral

[Bug c/111693] New: Online manual mentions -Wuse-after-free but does not document it further

: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- In the 13.2.0 documentation (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-13.2.0/gcc/Warning-Options.html), the list of options

[Bug c/111489] New: Incorrect "-Wmaybe-uninitialized" warning from GCC 13.2.0

ty: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- The problem occurs with GCC 13.2.0, and the submitted code also produces the warning in GCC 12.2.0, but minor variations o

[Bug c/111249] New: Aggressive loop optimization reports "iteration 2147483645 invokes undefined behavior"

NCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- The problem occurs with GCC 12.2.0 and GCC 13.2.0. It is difficult to see how the loop could

[Bug c/106757] New: Incorrect "writing 1 byte into a region of size 0" warning

ty: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 53515 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53515=edit Source code (gcc-bug.c) for t

[Bug c/106039] Inconsistent error reporting for printf() when format string is a macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106039 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Leffler --- I got an email from pinskia — thank you. I responded from an iPhone and got a message back about 'HTML attachments are not allowed'. I'm not sure if that got through. Anyway, what I said (tried to

[Bug c/106039] Inconsistent error reporting for printf() when format string is a macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106039 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Leffler --- Thank you for looking at this. In the second and subsequent errors, the line number of the macro is used in all three lines of the error report, whereas in the first, the second line of the messages is

[Bug c/106039] Inconsistent error reporting for printf() when format string is a macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106039 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Leffler --- Created attachment 53178 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53178=edit Output from gcc -v when compiling the test case

[Bug c/106039] Inconsistent error reporting for printf() when format string is a macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106039 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Leffler --- Created attachment 53177 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53177=edit Close to minimal source (4 format strings; 4 printf statements; some comments) Close to minimal source code. It

[Bug c/106039] New: Inconsistent error reporting for printf() when format string is a macro

: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 53176 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53176=edit Preprocessed output The prob

[Bug middle-end/95755] GCC 10.1.0 reports bogus sizes in -Werror=format-truncation= error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95755 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Leffler --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1) > The sizes used to trigger the warning are based on what it can determine > from the representation of source code it sees. ... Thank you for the

[Bug c/95755] New: GCC 10.1.0 reports bogus sizes in -Werror=format-truncation= error

Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 48754 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48754=edit Preprocessed source (also in body of

[Bug c/84685] Designated initializers warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84685 Jonathan Leffler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jonathan.leffler at gmail dot com

[Bug tree-optimization/55985] Misleading message about which variable 'may be used uninitialized in this function'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55985 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Leffler --- This problem has been mostly resolved in 5.3.0 (and quite possibly earlier): $ gcc -O3 -Werror -Wall -g -std=c99 -c -o gccbug.o gccbug.c gccbug.c: In function ‘updtypes’: gccbug.c:20:18: error:

[Bug c/55985] New: Misleading message about which variable 'may be used uninitialized in this function'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55985 Bug #: 55985 Summary: Misleading message about which variable 'may be used uninitialized in this function' Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.1