http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tutufan at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
--- Comment #14 from ejb at ql dot org 2011-06-27 18:06:15 UTC ---
Very nice to see this bug fixed. :-)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-23
08:15:24 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 23 08:15:16 2011
New Revision: 174058
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=174058
Log:
2011-05-23 Jonathan Wakely
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-22
09:17:42 UTC ---
Like others commenting here, I don't understand why a(a) should not warn only
with -Winit-self. On the other hand, I always thought that Winit-self is a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-22
14:40:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Like others commenting here, I don't understand why a(a) should not warn only
with -Winit-self.
I agree with Andrew, the a(a)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-21
17:19:57 UTC ---
my patch doesn't help in these cases (which clang does warn about):
A() : a(this-a) { }
A() : a((int)a) { }
A() : a(a+1) { }
For that we need proper tracking
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-16
16:05:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
A() : a(a) // -- should generate a warning
Clang warns about this with -Wuninitialized
My patch for PR 2972 *doesn't* help
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-21 19:17 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Is there any chance of activity on this bug?
It would be wonderful to have a warning for this
case, since these bugs can be extremely annoying to find.
-Winit-self is generally broken for
--- Comment #5 from irving at cs dot stanford dot edu 2007-04-27 16:45
---
Is there any chance of activity on this bug?
It would be wonderful to have a warning for this
case, since these bugs can be extremely annoying to find.
If the infrastructure supports it, the ideal way to
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-10-28 13:08 ---
That is my view, too. It's an initializer, not an assignment.
W.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-10-28 03:35
---
-Winit-self has nothing to do with this problem really.
in this case :a(a) is equivalent to this-a = this-a;
Not really. The member-list syntax is used to *initialize* the members, not to
assign a value
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-15 17:05
---
-Winit-self has nothing to do with this problem really.
in this case :a(a) is equivalent to this-a = this-a;
We should warn about this case even without -Winit-self or even -Wuninitialize as we
can warn
15 matches
Mail list logo
