From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13448 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2010 16:01:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 11711 invoked by uid 48); 2 Sep 2010 16:01:09 -0000 Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:01:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100902160109.11704.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c/42884] GCC (v4.3.3) fails to detect uninitialized variable In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "tadhunt at gmail dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-09/txt/msg00311.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #19 from tadhunt at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 16:01 ------- This flamewar in the comments is hilarious. To all concerned, here is a much simpler example. This does appear to be a regression. I apologize that I cannot help fix it, as it's a really useful feature that helps catch bugs. Hat's off to you folks working hard on gcc. int main(void) { int len, i; for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) { printf("%d\n", len); // no warning! len = 10; } return 0; } -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42884