Suspicion of regression in uninitialized value detection

[Jeff Law]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/07/11 01:19, David Brown wrote:

> 
> Would it be possible then to have switches for different levels,
> such as is done with the strict aliasing warnings?
Well, there's two obvious levels...  Not sure if there's a good way to
get something in between.


> Do people often intentionally run gcc without any optimisations
> these days?
Certainly.  Compile speed and debugging being the primary reasons.
However, as was mentioned we're always going into SSA (as a result of
the SSA->RTL expansion path), so that issue is gone.


>> 
> 
> In my opinion, we should nuke -Wall - these warning options should
> all be enabled unless explicitly /disabled/ with the -W options.
> And -Werror should be enabled by default too.  Just think how many
> bugs would be found in existing software if developers were pushed
> into using their tools effectively!
Well, lots of folks would disagree with that suggestion.  And that's
the root of the problem with this kind of issue -- different
developers have different needs.  Any significant change we make in
this space is probably going to make equal numbers of developers happy
and mad at the same time.

jeff
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO36rjAAoJEBRtltQi2kC7VbgIAIUBoB5BoQnP8EcPsak0h3A/
h5KgxrcQIji2tPDthshbXbL9vVf0PpLzn6SFC4ZUt37sMQu5CLNqyqfMgpHgukic
zTumkTZRlbVxt9/UVE/NDNN3DQtyzOE4QBj7a9Bp7kYDZEVEhCHFFyvSurv+1JJa
jixT3+okGZSsuhFzeSWiNo8s3mqAaZ+FAmDhsv95Z1y13nOw4WDPqynnUmGZ76ri
TBPUCtqOuJ69ZOVmzdsudw9o9BDuBTCQ2rgljVrbkT+fKlxyVuuiRmdWAte/7D21
u2EsuqMvEpYucX/2mBL/FoAi6T4LsEGxEJPzJS6p0cEbQFZXbygpP+RZtkRmbYI=
=nE95
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----