[Bug c++/69723] Inconsistent report of unused and uninitialized variables

[development@faf-ltd.com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69723

--- Comment #3 from Peter VARGA <development@faf-ltd.com> ---
Dear Jakob,

thank you for the explanation. But honestly, the "definition" when to warn is
in my eyes wrong. Even var++ is reading and then setting the variable in this
case it does NOT make sense!

Just imagine I had a function with 200 lines and I "forgot" this variable in a
refactoring process. gcc could have warn me because it is not logical and the
variable is set but NOT used.

May be the gcc community can reconsider the definition.