[Bug other/12411] Missed -Wsequence-point on functions (example reduced from historical GCC source)

[Bug other/12411] Missed -Wsequence-point on functions (example reduced from historical GCC source)

[rafael at espindo dot la]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12411

Rafael Avila de Espindola <rafael at espindo dot la> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rafael at espindo dot la

--- Comment #7 from Rafael Avila de Espindola <rafael at espindo dot la> ---
I think we just hit a case similar to this bug where it would be nice get a
warning.

Given

-------------------------
struct foo {
    void bar(int);
};
foo get_foo(int);
void g() {
    int a = 0;
    get_foo(a).bar(a++);
}
------------------------

GCC will warn about the value of a. If instead of an integer we have an object,
like in

--------------------------------
#include <utility>
struct zed {
    zed();
    zed(const zed&);
    zed(zed&&);
};
struct foo {
    void bar(zed);
};
foo get_foo(zed);
void g() {
    zed a;
    get_foo(a).bar(std::move(a));
}
--------------------------------

GCC produces no warning.

Let me know if I should report a new bug instead.

[Bug c/12411] Missed -Wsequence-point on functions (example reduced from historical GCC source)

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12411

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX
          Component|other                       |c
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
           Severity|normal                      |enhancement

--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So thinking about this, I highly doubt we want to warn about this case as it is
hard to even know what we are warning about if two functions have side effects
that matter which order they are in.

Anyways I filed this bug report so I am closing as won't fix.

[Bug c/12411] Missed -Wsequence-point on functions (example reduced from historical GCC source)

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12411

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |vt at altlinux dot org

--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 114507 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c/12411] Missed -Wsequence-point on functions (example reduced from historical GCC source)

[egallager at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12411

--- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think the dup is a point for reopening