This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Should -Wmaybe-uninitialized be included in -Wall?
- From: Andreas Arnez <arnez at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- To: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:04:10 +0200
- Subject: Re: Should -Wmaybe-uninitialized be included in -Wall?
- References: <87ehb8rljz dot fsf at br87z6lw dot de dot ibm dot com> <51DBFC32 dot 8050401 at redhat dot com> <87siznrg4y dot fsf at br87z6lw dot de dot ibm dot com> <8761wjk21i dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com>
Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
> gdb only enables it for the development branch, not for releases. If
> you're building from CVS you're expected to know how to either fix
> these problems or disable -Werror. Typically the fix is trivial; if
> you look through the archives you'll see fixes along these lines.
Right -- except that false positives from -Wmaybe-uninitialized may
actually not be trivial to fix, as demonstrated by the various GCC bugs
reported against this option. I was mentioning GDB as an example mainly
because of GCC bug 57287, "GCC 4.9.0 fails to build GDB on Ubuntu
12.04", where somebody has obviously stumbled across this. Comment 12
in that bug hints at a false positive that's still present with upstream
GCC, AFAIK.