From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21189 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2004 12:49:26 -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 21165 invoked by uid 48); 16 Sep 2004 12:49:25 -0000 Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:49:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040916124925.21164.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "bangerth at dealii dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040915183811.17506.nathan@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20040915183811.17506.nathan@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/17506] [4.0 regression] warning about uninitialized variable points to wrong location X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg01875.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-09-16 12:49 ------- I don't consider this a reasonable stop-gap[1]. And I wouldn't see why, in the presence of a small testcase at the beginning of stage 3 we shouldn't be able to fix this properly. W. [1] Nobody reads the release nodes (as shown with many PRs about not being able to access elements of template base class), and we're bound to get lots of bug reports that will be hard to reduce because the compiler doesn't say where a problem happens. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17506