public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jason at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/19808] miss a warning about uninitialized members in constructor Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:06:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-19808-4-PhaVKsNvNd@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-19808-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19808 Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #22 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #21) > I just got hit by this bug. This can obviously be warned in the FE as clang > does: > > test.cc:4:11: warning: field 'j' is uninitialized when used here > [-Wuninitialized] > S() : i(j), j(1) {} > ^ > > simply by marking the members somehow as initialized or not, and when using > them realizing that they are still uninitialized. > > Marek, Paolo, Jason? Any idea how to do this? It could be done specifically for uses in mem-initializers by walking the initializer in perform_mem_init to look for any references to members that haven't been marked yet. A more general warning that would cover, say, X x; x.x = x.y; would need support in the existing back end -Wuninitialized code. >From gcc-bugs-return-462847-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Sep 29 13:10:42 2014 Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-462847-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org> Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10432 invoked by alias); 29 Sep 2014 13:10:41 -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 10388 invoked by uid 48); 29 Sep 2014 13:10:37 -0000 From: "jason at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/62164] 5.0: ICE: error: Both section and comdat group is set Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:10:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jason at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW 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: cc Message-ID: <bug-62164-4-NcAuFghIsH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-62164-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-62164-4@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: 2014-09/txt/msg02681.txt.bz2 Content-length: 807 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idb164 Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #2) > The sections for COMDAT functions are used to drive code unification. I > wonder, do we want to support something like this (and expect that user > knows what he is doing and he won't, for example, drop multiple COMDATs into > one section) or just reject the attribute? What's wrong with dropping multiple COMDATs into one section? Don't we normally stick lots of COMDATs into .text?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-29 13:06 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <bug-19808-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2013-07-17 9:26 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-09-27 20:29 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-09-29 13:06 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2014-09-29 14:35 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-11-15 23:11 ` [Bug c++/19808] miss a warning about uninitialized member usage in member initializer list " anthony.brandon at gmail dot com 2014-11-16 19:14 ` anthony.brandon at gmail dot com 2020-10-21 23:28 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-11-12 15:07 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-11-13 3:07 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-11-05 23:33 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-11-19 3:38 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-11-19 3:54 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-11-19 9:09 ` dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2021-11-19 11:00 ` dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2021-11-19 11:09 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-11-19 16:57 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-11-23 20:02 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org [not found] <bug-19808-5329@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2006-02-02 12:58 ` [Bug c++/19808] miss a warning about uninitialized members " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-04 21:04 ` myselfhimself at free dot fr 2008-07-21 14:31 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 12:46 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 12:59 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 16:44 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 18:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 19:10 ` bart dot vanassche at gmail dot com 2010-02-24 19:45 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 20:13 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 20:15 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 20:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 20:30 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 20:44 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-24 20:45 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-25 7:01 ` bart dot vanassche at gmail dot com 2010-02-25 7:06 ` bart dot vanassche at gmail dot com 2005-02-07 23:16 [Bug c++/19808] New: " adl at gnu dot org 2005-02-08 9:35 ` [Bug c++/19808] " bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-02-08 9:59 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot 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-19808-4-PhaVKsNvNd@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: linkBe 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).