Re: Compiling with gcc-4.0.0 and -fno-exceptions

[Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com>]

Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@suse.de> writes:

> >                                       I would suggest trying to figure
> >which is the current situation in Bugzilla, 4.0.1 pre, and mainline (I
> >can also do that, of course, but would appreciate a stand-alone snippet
> >from your work) and then take the appropriate action.
> >
> The issue seems fixed in mainline (I'm using simple testcases like a
> single uninitialized_copy on a vector of non-PODs, -fno-exceptions -O
> -Wreturn-type). However, seems still present in 4_0-branch,
> unfortunately. I would suggest making sure that there are no duplicate
> PRs and, in case, file one, the safe way: it can even be that in
> mainline it's fixed by chance ;)

It's fixed in mainline intentionally, not by chance.  It was fixed by
building a CFG for all functions before inlining.

In 4.0 we had the choice of an occasional false positive or an
occasional false negative.  Since it was a warning option, we chose
the false positive.

Ian