From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-106641-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 23471 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2004 18:09:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23051 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2004 18:09:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 15 Dec 2004 18:09:24 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id DF8F89611; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:09:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP
 id 25072-01-10; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:09:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (taconic.gnat.com [205.232.38.103])
	by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9375C9601; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:09:23 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <41C07DD7.2020404@adacore.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:09:00 -0000
From: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Korn <dave.korn@artimi.com>
Cc: 'Joe Buck' <Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM>,
	'Dmitry Antipov' <antipov@dev.rtsoft.ru>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Dubious "'foo' might be used uninitialized in this function"
 message
References: <NUTMEG4euumThMeOaIX0000076d@NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
In-Reply-To: <NUTMEG4euumThMeOaIX0000076d@NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00603.txt.bz2

I also think it is fine if optimization *suppresses* warnings if
it can tell they are not needed. It is problematic if warnings
appear when you optimize, but if the alternative is not getting
the warnings at all, how is that better ???