From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id D398E39858A9; Fri, 15 May 2020 15:36:04 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D398E39858A9 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1589556964; bh=Kdq0QKn+JgkXUYb7Nbd6DhnYZy4XKzRYxtTQjt0IDSs=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=qPfrIZECPAS/4kg+T1vdXCtg/8M6HY4tQMk9CRzR/ccSMBj4/Gaa4EF8zMQ3fe1gd ffptGjFyHcnO6uMPywrcZMh+I6jYALh8uGB1TektXjr+663WiNIizwqjNOFQkb3RY+ lujsME9P0tpFEouynvLGKDVio8e3rBPoOPzpb4gs= From: "rafael at espindo dot la" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/83028] Incorrect -Wsequence-point warning in correct C++17 code with new evaluation order rules Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 15:36:04 +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: 8.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rafael at espindo dot la X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 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: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 15:36:04 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D83028 Rafael Avila de Espindola changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rafael at espindo dot la --- Comment #3 from Rafael Avila de Espindola --- We just hit this and incorrectly assumed our codebase had a bug. It would be really nice for this warning to take -std=3DXX into consideration and not w= arn for code that is now valid.=