From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16402 invoked by alias); 26 May 2003 19:06:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 14027 invoked by alias); 26 May 2003 19:05:59 -0000 Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 19:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030526190559.14026.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030318174600.10138.h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug other/10138] -Wuninitialized could catch uninitialized arrays X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg02969.txt.bz2 List-Id: PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10138 ------- Additional Comments From h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no 2003-05-26 19:05 ------- Subject: Re: [Bug other/10138] -Wuninitialized could catch uninitialized arrays pinskia@physics.uc.edu writes: > The second suggestion is already a different bug, and that is why I > just changed it to this one(see bug 179). No, bug 179 is a another bug, where - use(&i) would actually prevent a preceding -Wuninitialized warning. What I'd like is for use(&i) itself to give a warning. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.