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: zero sized initializers with side effects discarded

From: Olivier Hainque <hainque at adacore dot com>
To: Dave Korn <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
Cc: 'Daniel Berlin' <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,hainque at adacore dot com
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 15:55:23 +0200
Subject: Re: zero sized initializers with side effects discarded
References: <20050909152526.A19744@rome.act-europe.fr> <SERRANOl4VsA6XktM1q0000029f@SERRANO.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>

Dave Korn wrote:
>   Surely returning the vaule of this uninitialised variable makes your code
> invalid?

 Well, sure. Adding an initializer in one_raw_spinlock doesn't help.

 The t03.gimple dump reads:

   main ()
   {
     struct spinlock_t D.1783;
     int D.1784;
     struct spinlock_t lock;

     D.1784 = 0;
     return D.1784;
   }

References:
- Re: zero sized initializers with side effects discarded
  - From: Olivier Hainque
- RE: zero sized initializers with side effects discarded
  - From: Dave Korn

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