From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-341464-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 31333 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2010 17:20:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 31319 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Dec 2010 17:20:07 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:20:03 +0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/18016] Warn about member variables initialized with itself
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-18016-4-lXZ9xaZMX5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-18016-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-18016-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:20:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg02447.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016

--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-12-21 17:19:57 UTC ---
my patch doesn't help in these cases (which clang does warn about):
A() : a(this->a) { }
A() : a((int)a) { }
A() : a(a+1) { }
For that we need proper tracking of uninitialized variables, which we don't do
for member variables.  But my patch catches the simple typo where you
accidentally use the wrong variable name in a mem-initializer.