public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "hv at crypt dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/102329] pointer "maybe uninitialized" right after assignment
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 03:50:33 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-102329-4-zgG7Fqg2Tt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-102329-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102329

--- Comment #2 from Hugo van der Sanden <hv at crypt dot org> ---
I guess this is justified by the second paragraph of the -Wmaybe-uninitialized
docs: "In addition, passing a pointer (or in C++, a reference) to an
uninitialized object to a const-qualified function argument is also diagnosed
by this warning."

Firstly, I'd request for this case that the wording of the diagnostic should
clarify that it's the data pointed to that may be used uninitialized rather
than the pointer itself.

Secondly, I think there's a case to be made that 'const void *' should
specifically be exempt from this warning: that a void* is not "a pointer to an
object". (The specific call in the original code was to pthread_getspecific();
it seems reasonable that it should take a 'const void *' as its second
argument.)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-09-15  3:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-14 16:49 [Bug c/102329] New: " hv at crypt dot org
2021-09-14 16:56 ` [Bug c/102329] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-15  3:50 ` hv at crypt dot org [this message]
2021-09-15  7:55 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102329] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-15 15:44 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-17 11:41 ` hv at crypt dot org
2021-09-20 14:56 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-18 13:51 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-18 21:10 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102329] [11/12 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-20 10:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-21  7:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-29 10:05 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102329] [11/12/13/14 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-102329-4-zgG7Fqg2Tt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).