This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFC: -Wall by default


On 4/5/2012 4:24 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
Gabriel Dos Reis<gdr@integrable-solutions.net> writes:

If it is the non-expert that would be caught in code so non-obvious that
-Wuninitialized would trip into false positives, then it is highly
likely that the code might in fact contain an error.

I wish this were the case, but alas I continue to see fairly trivial false positives from -Wuninitialized. Usually cases where the initialization and the use are both protected by equivalent conditionals at different places in the function.

Yes, and often it is not so easy for the compiler to see that the conditionals are always the same

Personally, as a matter of *style*, I eliminate such cases either by initializing the variable or restructuring the function. But this is very much a question of style, not of correctness.

Indeed, and for me, when you are forced to do an initialization like
this, it is mandatory to comment why you are initializing it, otherwise
it obscures the code ("why is this being initialized, where is that
value used?") and that ends up junky IMO. The Ada front end unfortunately has quite a few such commented junk initializations.



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]