public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 18:31:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-19430-4-WK2fxFm9sb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-19430-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19430

--- Comment #25 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #23)
> BTW, I suppose that in this test, -Wuninitialized should be changed to
> "-Wuninitialized -Wmaybe-uninitialized" in case it is decided later that
> -Wuninitialized no longer enables -Wmaybe-uninitialized (see PR59223 about
> that).

I don't see any reason for -Wuninitialized to not enable -Wmaybe-uninitialized.
>From gcc-bugs-return-435439-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu Nov 21 18:44:29 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-435439-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 7084 invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2013 18:44:29 -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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6671 invoked by uid 48); 21 Nov 2013 18:44:25 -0000
From: "janus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/59228] ICE with assume type and ASYNCHRONOUS
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 18:44:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: keywords cc
Message-ID: <bug-59228-4-JBrZZGRvUA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-59228-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-59228-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-11/txt/msg02216.txt.bz2
Content-length: 769

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idY228

janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |ice-on-invalid-code
                 CC|                            |janus at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Valery Weber from comment #0)
> The following wrong code is producing an ICE with gcc version 4.9.0 20131119.
> Should gcc report an error rank mismatch instead?

It certainly should!


The ICE happens with 4.8 and trunk, while 4.7 rejects the TYPE(*) statement
(together with the rank-mismatch error), so one could regards it as a
regression.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-11-21 18:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-19430-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2013-11-21  3:11 ` [Bug middle-end/19430] V_MAY_DEF (taking address of var) " vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
2013-11-21 12:16 ` [Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-11-21 18:31 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2013-11-21 23:57 ` vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
2020-10-27 17:05 ` [Bug middle-end/19430] taking address of a var causes missing uninitialized warning (virtual PHI with MEM) msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-04-01  0:23 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-08-29 13:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-08-29 13:16 ` rguenth 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-19430-4-WK2fxFm9sb@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).