Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> writes: > Hello, > > I followed the advice in this discussion: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00269.html > > and here is a new patch. I made an effort to isolate a path in at least > one subcase so it doesn't look too strange that the warning is in this > file. Computing the dominance info just to tweak the warning message may > be a bit excessive.
How about only calculating it once you've decided to issue a message? > + if (always_executed) > + msg = "function returns address of local variable"; > + else > + msg = "function may return address of local variable"; I think you need _(...) here, unless some magic makes that unnecessary now. Thanks, Richard
