public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/64759] New: The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message.
@ 2015-01-23 23:43 lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in
2015-01-23 23:46 ` [Bug c++/64759] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in @ 2015-01-23 23:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64759
Bug ID: 64759
Summary: The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where
it is reasonable to expect a warning message.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in
Created attachment 34558
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34558&action=edit
test code that I used
using the logical not operator on a double does not show a compiler warning.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/64759] The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message. 2015-01-23 23:43 [Bug c++/64759] New: The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in @ 2015-01-23 23:46 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-01-23 23:54 ` lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-01-23 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64759 Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|4.8.2 |unknown --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- !x is the same as x == 0.0 and yes sometimes it make sense to compare against zero. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/64759] The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message. 2015-01-23 23:43 [Bug c++/64759] New: The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in 2015-01-23 23:46 ` [Bug c++/64759] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-01-23 23:54 ` lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in 2015-01-24 8:03 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in @ 2015-01-23 23:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64759 --- Comment #2 from Lakshay Garg <lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > !x is the same as x == 0.0 and yes sometimes it make sense to compare > against zero. It makes sense to compare against 0 but not 0.0 . NOT operation makes sense when used with booleans and integers. If someone is using logical not with doubles then there is a high chance that it was done unintentionally. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/64759] The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message. 2015-01-23 23:43 [Bug c++/64759] New: The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in 2015-01-23 23:46 ` [Bug c++/64759] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-01-23 23:54 ` lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in @ 2015-01-24 8:03 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org 2015-01-24 14:53 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-01-24 14:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: schwab@linux-m68k.org @ 2015-01-24 8:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64759 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> --- How often does that occur in real life? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/64759] The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message. 2015-01-23 23:43 [Bug c++/64759] New: The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2015-01-24 8:03 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org @ 2015-01-24 14:53 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-01-24 14:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-01-24 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64759 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Lakshay Garg from comment #2) > It makes sense to compare against 0 but not 0.0 Huh? Why not? This code seems perfectly reasonable to me: double divisor; std::cin >> divisor; if (!divisor) throw std::invalid_argument("Divide by zero attempted"); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/64759] The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message. 2015-01-23 23:43 [Bug c++/64759] New: The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2015-01-24 14:53 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-01-24 14:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-01-24 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64759 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (well, apart from not checking if the input operation failed ;-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-01-24 14:54 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-01-23 23:43 [Bug c++/64759] New: The compiler does NOT show a warning in a case where it is reasonable to expect a warning message lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in 2015-01-23 23:46 ` [Bug c++/64759] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-01-23 23:54 ` lakshayg at iitk dot ac.in 2015-01-24 8:03 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org 2015-01-24 14:53 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-01-24 14:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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).