Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wipedout at yandex dot ru
Target Milestone: ---
On http://gcc.godbolt.org/ I select gcc 6.1 and specify -O3 -Wall
Here's the code:
struct CHandle {
int handle;
int GetHandle() const
{
if (this == 0
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wipedout at yandex dot ru
Target Milestone: ---
On http://gcc.godbolt.org/ I select gcc 6.1 and specify -O3 -Wall
The code is:
struct CHandle {
int handle;
int GetHandle() const
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wipedout at yandex dot ru
Target Milestone: ---
On http://gcc.godbolt.org/ I select gcc 6.1 and specify -O3 -Wall
The code is:
#include
int main()
{
INT64_MIN; // no warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69686
--- Comment #5 from wipedout at yandex dot ru ---
Here the compiler just enforces people to add parentheses so that they
accidentally put them wrong and then the compiler is happy and the code is
buggy.
onent: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wipedout at yandex dot ru
Target Milestone: ---
I'm compiling this with gcc 5.3.0 with -O3 -Wall -std=c++11
void test()
{
int a, b;
if(a || !a && b);
}
Please ignore the uninitialized variables for now.
I
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wipedout at yandex dot ru
Target Milestone: ---
I'm compiling this with gcc 5.3.0 with -O3 -Wall -std=c++11
void test()
{
int a, b, c;
if(a && b || !a && c);
}
Please ignore th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39159
wipedout at yandex dot ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wipedout at yandex dot ru
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wipedout at yandex dot ru
Target Milestone: ---
I'm trying this on http://gcc.godbolt.org/ the version is "x86 gcc 5.3.0", the
options line is "-O3 -
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wipedout at yandex dot ru
Target Milestone: ---
I'm trying this on http://gcc.godbolt.org/ the version is "x86 gcc 5.3.0", the
options line is "-O3 -Wall -std=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69672
--- Comment #1 from wipedout at yandex dot ru ---
"distinct warnings" should be "distinct enums"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69482
--- Comment #6 from wipedout at yandex dot ru ---
The explanations sound reasonable so far. Yet I expect that this problem will
be reported again and again because WOW A SECURITY HOLE so perhaps it'd be
reasonable to change gcc behavior so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69482
--- Comment #4 from wipedout at yandex dot ru ---
Okay, suppose we have the following scenario. There's a third party library
with an encryption function like this:
void encrypt( void* data, void* key );
That function is compiled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69482
wipedout at yandex dot ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wipedout at yandex dot ru
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: wipedout at yandex dot ru
Target Milestone: ---
I'm trying this on http://gcc.godbolt.org/ The compiler selected is "x86 gcc
5.3.0", the command line option string is
14 matches
Mail list logo
