This is the mail archive of the egcs@egcs.cygnus.com mailing list for the EGCS project. See the EGCS home page for more information.
In message <199903120010.TAA03507@blastula.phys.columbia.edu>you write: > uninit-4.c is bizarre: the warning goes away if you remove the '1' > case, or if you replace 'struct operation' by an int, or even if you > make 'struct operation' smaller! Also, if you take out the default > case _and_ the '1' case, the warning goes away, but it shouldn't (what > if cpp_lex returns 3?) Not weird at all. Changing the numberof cases or density of the switch may cause the compiler to emit it as a series of cascaded if/else statements which the compiler is better able to analyze. Structures also present some interesting problems to the uninitialized variable analysis. It's quite a bit more difficult for the compiler to determine that an entire structure has been initialized as opposed to a simple integer or floating point variable. > The tests are marked XFAIL - all systems. I'm interested to know if > they pass on anyone's machine. They probably will pass on some machines because of differences in switch table density threshholds (at least uninit-4) jeff