Tony wrote:

> On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 7:57 PM Bram Moolenaar <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Patch 8.2.4992 (after 8.2.4989)
> > Problem:    Compiler warning for possibly uninitialized variable. (Tony
> >             Mechelynck)
> > Solution:   Initialize variable in the caller instead of in the function.
> > Files:      src/userfunc.c, src/vim9execute.c
> 
> The warning has not disappeared:
> 
> gcc -c -I. -Iproto -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DFEAT_GUI_GTK
> -I/usr/include/gtk-3.0 -I/usr/include/pango-1.0
> -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include
> -I/usr/include/harfbuzz -I/usr/include/freetype2
> -I/usr/include/libmount -I/usr/include/blkid -I/usr/include/fribidi
> -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pixman-1 -I/usr/include/libpng16
> -I/usr/include/gdk-pixbuf-2.0 -I/usr/include/gio-unix-2.0
> -I/usr/include/wayland -I/usr/include/libxkbcommon
> -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/at-spi2-atk/2.0
> -I/usr/include/dbus-1.0 -I/usr/lib64/dbus-1.0/include
> -I/usr/include/at-spi-2.0 -pthread    -O2 -fno-strength-reduce -Wall
> -Wno-deprecated-declarations -D_REENTRANT -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE
> -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3D1        -o objects/vim9execute.o vim9execute.c
> vim9execute.c: In function =E2=80=98ex_disassemble=E2=80=99:
> vim9execute.c:6319:5: warning: =E2=80=98instr_count=E2=80=99 may be used un=
> initialized
> [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
>  6319 |     list_instructions("", instr, instr_count, ufunc);
>       |     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> vim9execute.c:6283:17: note: =E2=80=98instr_count=E2=80=99 was declared her=
> e
>  6283 |     int         instr_count;
>       |                 ^~~~~~~~~~~
> vim9execute.c:6319:5: warning: =E2=80=98instr=E2=80=99 may be used uninitia=
> lized
> [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
>  6319 |     list_instructions("", instr, instr_count, ufunc);
>       |     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> vim9execute.c:6282:18: note: =E2=80=98instr=E2=80=99 was declared here
>  6282 |     isn_T       *instr;
>       |                  ^~~~~

Strange, that did not logically change with that patch.
I suppose the compiler has some brain-dead way to detect uninitialized
variables.  Perhaps before the patch it was confused, and now it's more
certain about the variables not being initialized.

-- 
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
250. You've given up the search for the "perfect woman" and instead,
     sit in front of the PC until you're just too tired to care.

 /// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
///                                                                      \\\
\\\        sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ ///
 \\\            help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org    ///

-- 
-- 
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"vim_dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/20220521205239.B99891C0475%40moolenaar.net.

Raspunde prin e-mail lui