------- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-20 23:56 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> The main reason why is that we don't process the initializer for foo if we get
> an error.
What? Don't we process the initializer of foo before processing bar()? That is
weird.
But we still parse that foo is initialized, so there should be no warning.
This is confirmed in trunk.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
GCC host triplet|x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu |
Known to fail| |4.4.0
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-02-20 23:56:36
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32205
