On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Joe Buck<joe.b...@synopsys.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Alan Modra<amo...@bigpond.net.au> wrote: >> > ..., but I think this warning should be in -Wc++-compat, not -Wall >> > or even -Wextra. Why? I'd argue the warning is useless for C code, >> > unless you care about C++ style. > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:35:48AM -0700, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: >> I do not think it is useless for C99 codes because C99 allows >> C++ style declarations/initialization in the middle of a block. > > But if the initialization is skipped and the variable is then used, > won't we get an uninitialized-variable warning?
Did we get any in the cases Ian reported? -- Gaby
