From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4013 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2010 01:25:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 3999 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Dec 2010 01:25:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 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; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 01:25:23 +0000 From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/18501] [4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Missing 'used uninitialized' warning (CCP) X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: minor X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P5 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.3.6 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 01:25:00 -0000 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: 2010-12/txt/msg01066.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501 --- Comment #49 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-12-10 01:24:19 UTC --- (In reply to comment #46) > > If fixing known bugs is not a priority then of what value is this project other > than being free? I thought the whole point was to also be correct. Granted > this isn't a show-stopper as far as bugs go, but the laissez-faire "if you hate > it fix it yourself" trend in OSS is really annoying. So is the trend of users who leave snarky "just saying" comments claiming things "can't be done right." GCC is not a static analysis tool, it will never be as good at some things as some other tools - that doesn't make it useless or incorrect. Imperfect, yes, and noone disputes that. Fixing bugs is a priority, just look on the mailing lists to see how many are fixed. Search for Manu's comments to see how hard he works (in his own time) trying to fix longstanding bugs such as this, or at least try to improve the situation slightly, or just identify duplicate reports. But not all bugs are equal. To generalise from the fact that one particularly difficult bug hasn't been fixed to claim that fixing known bugs is not a priority, and to question the value of the entire project, just makes you sound ridiculous.