From: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Cc: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix -Os related -Werror failures.
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 20:10:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7820c555-1463-6c3a-17e5-650a44fabd19@cs.ucla.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20863164.XNWC5rYB1g@wuerfel>
On 10/28/2016 01:12 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I found that most often when gcc is confused about whether a variable is uninitialized or not, the source code tends to be confusing to a human reader as well and rewriting it differently results in better readability and better object code while avoiding the warning.
I'm afraid my experience has not been so good. Maybe 1/3 of the time rewriting is better, but otherwise rewriting doesn't help or even confuses the code. When that happens with -Wmaybe-uninitialized, in Emacs we typically use C declarations like this:
ptrdiff_t offset2 UNINIT; /* The UNINIT works around GCC bug
78081. */
where UNINIT is defined something like this:
#ifdef GCC_LINT
# define UNINIT = {0,}
#else
# define UNINIT /* empty */
#endif
and configuring with --enable-gcc-warnings compiles with something like
'gcc -Wall -Werror -DGCC_LINT'.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-28 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-28 4:48 Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-28 6:25 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-10-28 6:32 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-28 6:44 ` Jeff Law
2016-10-28 8:12 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-10-28 8:17 ` Andrew Pinski
2016-10-28 13:28 ` Jeff Law
2016-10-28 20:10 ` Paul Eggert [this message]
2016-10-29 3:03 ` Jeff Law
2016-10-30 4:25 ` Paul Eggert
2016-10-28 12:09 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-28 12:43 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-28 13:04 ` Joseph Myers
2016-10-28 13:07 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-28 12:49 ` Joseph Myers
2016-10-28 12:55 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-28 13:18 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-28 13:58 ` [PATCH v2] Fix -Os related build and test failures Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-28 14:17 ` Joseph Myers
2016-10-29 2:59 ` [PATCH v3] " Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-29 3:26 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-29 17:35 ` Joseph Myers
2016-10-30 3:51 ` [PATCH v4] " Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-31 8:33 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-10-31 9:16 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-31 9:22 ` Florian Weimer
2016-10-31 12:56 ` David Miller
2016-10-31 19:56 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-11-01 22:59 ` Joseph Myers
2016-11-02 12:52 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-11-01 9:17 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-11-01 11:13 ` Joseph Myers
2016-11-01 15:58 ` Tamar Christina
2016-11-01 16:06 ` David Miller
2016-11-01 16:15 ` Tamar Christina
2016-11-02 11:53 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-11-02 17:03 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-11-02 13:22 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-31 18:38 ` [PATCH v3] " Steve Ellcey
2016-10-31 19:50 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-31 19:57 ` Steve Ellcey
2016-10-31 20:50 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-10-31 21:00 ` Steve Ellcey
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=7820c555-1463-6c3a-17e5-650a44fabd19@cs.ucla.edu \
--to=eggert@cs.ucla.edu \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.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: link
Be 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).