http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46759
--- Comment #3 from rwgk at yahoo dot com 2010-12-02 19:47:29 UTC --- Created attachment 22606 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22606 reproducer with additional tests I changed the original reproducer to return 0 through 4 instead of true or false to verify that each branch is exercised with added tests. The output is as expected and valgrind doesn't report problems. Therefore I still believe the warning misfires. Assuming my code holds up under further scrutinization: It clearly is a minor problem but it creates distracting noise. If it is too much trouble to fix in the 4.5 branch, could the example be added to the test suite in the trunk, so that the same problem doesn't crop up again in the future? % valgrind a.out ==20636== Memcheck, a memory error detector ==20636== Copyright (C) 2002-2009, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. ==20636== Using Valgrind-3.5.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info ==20636== Command: a.out ==20636== 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 ==20636== ==20636== HEAP SUMMARY: ==20636== in use at exit: 0 bytes in 0 blocks ==20636== total heap usage: 0 allocs, 0 frees, 0 bytes allocated ==20636== ==20636== All heap blocks were freed -- no leaks are possible ==20636== ==20636== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v ==20636== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 6 from 6)
