Suspicion of regression in uninitialized value detection

[Robert Dewar]

On 12/6/2011 9:16 AM, David Brown wrote:

> I would say it's better to have false positives in cases like this, than
> false negatives, because there are easy ways to remove the false
> positives.

My view is that for compiler warnings, you want to balance false
positives and false negatives. If you give too many false positives
people just turn off the warning anyway. I think the current balance
is probably about right.

If you want more thorough warnings, with no false negatives, then
separate static analysis tools are more appropriate. They can do a
better job than the compiler in any case.