From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>
To: Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>
Cc: Kevin Atkinson <kevina@users.sourceforge.net>, Joern Rennecke <amylaar@redhat.com>, Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.COM>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Uninitialized warnings
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:02:00 -0000
Message-id: <200107172301.QAA04279@scv1.apple.com>
References: <20010718003301.A4121@alinoe.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg01235.html

On Tuesday, July 17, 2001, at 03:33 PM, Carlo Wood wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 09:51:06AM -0700, Dale Johannesen wrote:
>> we're the first people to think of this, which gives me pause.  Is a
>> patch that checks for uninitalized variables even without optimization
>> likely to be accepted?
>
> Please don't add any warning that can generate false positives.
> I'd rather have no warning at all for 100 actual bugs than
> 100 correct warnings and a false positive.

Believe it or not, I agree with you, but I'm definitely in a small 
minority (1?) around here.  Is there a consensus on how the 
uninitialized-variable check should behave?