[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[manu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-01-09 14:57 -------
Another Wsequence-point bug is PR 17880.


-- 

manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |manu at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202

[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[manu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-01-16 22:02 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created an attachment (id=7299)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7299&action=view) [edit]
> proposed patch
> 
> I've attached a more official-looking patch, with a testsuite change to
> gcc.dg/sequence-pt-1.c and a new sequence-pt-2.c
> 

Could you send your patch to gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, please ? Thanks.

You can find more info on contributing to GCC development at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202

[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[manu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-01-16 22:35 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created an attachment (id=7299)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7299&action=view) [edit]
> proposed patch
> 
> I've attached a more official-looking patch, with a testsuite change to
> gcc.dg/sequence-pt-1.c and a new sequence-pt-2.c

This patch does not even compile on current mainline, since lvalue_p was moved
out of c-common.c to c-typeck.c and to cp/tree.c :( 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202

[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[trt at acm dot org]

------- Comment #9 from trt at acm dot org  2007-01-17 18:15 -------
I made lvalue_p a global function in my personal gcc.

I've proposed a dozen different warnings-related things for gcc, and never made
headway on any of them.  I'm just a random user and don't know the secret
handshake.  The people who do seem utterly uninterested in gcc diagnostics.

If you, or anyone, would get this patch working and into gcc, I would be
delighted.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202

[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[manu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #10 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-01-17 19:12 -------
I am also new, my first patch was just a few months ago, so let me say that I
understand your situation. On the other hand, I got patches committed, so also
let me say that it is not as bad as you may think.

The secret handshake is quite simple actually:

1) Have a copyright assignment: http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#legal

2) Post patches to gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org (you can also add them to the patch
queue http://www.dberlin.org/patchdirections.html but posting to gcc-patches is
essential, bugzilla attachments are not considered serious proposals). 

3) Add testcases to the patch and bootstrap and regression test for a recent
revision, and say that you have done so. Add a Changelog to your mail (but not
to the patch). More info at http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html

4) Wait, wait, wait, make a comment about your patch pending review (if you
follow the list, you will see that people do this very often), then wait, wait
and wait a bit more, perhaps make another comment and eventually your patch
will be reviewed and surely you will have to make changes. In that case, goto
2.

5) Ask for someone to commit the patch for yourself or ask for
write-after-approval rights. The wait-wait-wait thing may apply here again.
Patience, you can have as many patches pending review as you wish, just ping
them once every while.

Easy, isn't it?

I think the first step is to get subscribed to gcc-patches to check out how
people submit and get reviewed patches. What are you waiting for? We look
forward to have you on board!

Cheers,

Manuel.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202

[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[manu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #11 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-10-24 17:21 -------
Patch for GCC 4.5 :

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-10/msg01066.html


-- 

manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                URL|                            |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
                   |                            |patches/2008-
                   |                            |10/msg01066.html
           Keywords|                            |patch


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202

[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[manu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1730 bytes --]



------- Comment #12 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-04-21 07:47 -------
Subject: Bug 16202

Author: manu
Date: Tue Apr 21 07:47:13 2009
New Revision: 146472

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=146472
Log:
2009-04-21  Manuel López-Ibáñez  <manu@gcc.gnu.org>

        PR 16202
        * c-typeck.c (lvalue_p): Move declaration ...
        * c-common.h (lvalue_p): ... to here.
        * c-common.c (candidate_equal_p): New.
        (add_tlist): Use it.
        (merge_tlist): Use it.
        (warn_for_collisions_1): Likewise.
        (warning_candidate_p): Accept more candidates.
        (verify_tree): A warning candidate can be an expression. Use
        candidate_equal_p.
cp/
        * tree.c (lvalue_p_1): Use const_tree.
        Use CONST_CAST_TREE to avoid warning.
        (lvalue_p): Returns bool, receives const_tree.
testsuite/
        * gcc.dg/sequence-pt-1.c: Remove XFAILs.
        * gcc.dg/sequence-pt-2.c: New.
        * gcc.dg/sequence-pt-3.c: New.
        * g++.dg/warn/sequence-pt-1.C: Remove XFAILs.
        * g++.dg/warn/sequence-pt-2.c: New.
        * g++.dg/warn/sequence-pt-3.c: New.

Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/sequence-pt-2.C
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/sequence-pt-3.C
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sequence-pt-2.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sequence-pt-3.c
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/c-common.c
    trunk/gcc/c-common.h
    trunk/gcc/c-typeck.c
    trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h
    trunk/gcc/cp/tree.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/sequence-pt-1.C
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sequence-pt-1.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202

[Bug c/16202] The -Wsequence-point warning misses many important instances

[manu at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #13 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-04-21 07:48 -------
FIXED in GCC 4.5


-- 

manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16202