https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #29 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:732d744e82332e7cc269694197c0df2a3635730f
commit r12-9161-g732d744e82332e7cc269694197c0df2a3635730f
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #31 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c3ba6680492ee1ddef6ae8493787c36c45c2d20e
commit r12-9163-gc3ba6680492ee1ddef6ae8493787c36c45c2d20e
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #30 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:72af61b122127b112215d496d65c64cfdc56fce8
commit r12-9162-g72af61b122127b112215d496d65c64cfdc56fce8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #27)
> Ah, I'm not even sure if it applies cleanly but if it does, go ahead.
It does apply cleanly, and the new c-c++-common/Winit-self1.c FAILs without it
and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #27 from Marek Polacek ---
Ah, I'm not even sure if it applies cleanly but if it does, go ahead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #25)
> Okay, let me test the backport then.
Well, I already have 40 backports in my 12 tree, so could add your commit and
the 3 from this PR above it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #25 from Marek Polacek ---
Okay, let me test the backport then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #23)
> I'm somewhat uneasy about backporting PR102633, to be honest. But I could
> try and test gcc 12 to see if it causes any problems, if you want me to.
I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #23 from Marek Polacek ---
I'm somewhat uneasy about backporting PR102633, to be honest. But I could try
and test gcc 12 to see if it causes any problems, if you want me to.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #21 from James Addison ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #20)
> (In reply to James Addison from comment #19)
> > Would adding '-Wuninitialized -Werror=uninitialized' to the dg-options in
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to James Addison from comment #19)
> Would adding '-Wuninitialized -Werror=uninitialized' to the dg-options in
> 'gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/avx-1.c' be possible, with these fixes in
> place?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #19 from James Addison ---
Thanks, Jakub!
(I had begun developing a patch locally, but hadn't found all of the six
locations, and learning some of the contributing guidelines was going to take
me a while)
Would adding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:41602390456901c14ecdfa2fa64c3cebd5b6ff09
commit r13-5526-g41602390456901c14ecdfa2fa64c3cebd5b6ff09
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to James Addison from comment #16)
> Does it make sense to update some of the other variable declarations (like
> this[1] one) within optimized blocks to use self-initialization as part of
> this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #16 from James Addison ---
Does it make sense to update some of the other variable declarations (like
this[1] one) within optimized blocks to use self-initialization as part of this
bug, or should I create a separate bug for that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed on the trunk so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6b0907b4fc455377e5f8109f427d97da02b6aec9
commit r13-5186-g6b0907b4fc455377e5f8109f427d97da02b6aec9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98b41fd4045b7856e7b85dd58d67c600bd909379
commit r13-5185-g98b41fd4045b7856e7b85dd58d67c600bd909379
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Seems the difference between C and C++ is documented:
'-Winit-self (C, C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++ only)'
Warn about uninitialized variables that are initialized with
themselves. Note
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
James Addison changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jay+g...@jp-hosting.net
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #5)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > fails to hide the -Wuninitialized with the C++ frontend, works correct with
> > the C frontend and on the GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bill.trost at harmonicinc dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
--- Comment #6 from Rogério de Souza Moraes ---
I got another example with similar warning:
#
#include
//#pragma GCC diagnostic push
//#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wmaybe-uninitialized"
#include
//#pragma GCC diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|---
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105593
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
28 matches
Mail list logo
