So, I analyzed other warnings and following is the list of relevant warning that I could collect. Hope this is useful.
gcc/ipa-icf.c:508:12: warning: logical not is only applied to the left hand side of this comparison ../../gcc/ipa-icf.c:508:12: warning: logical not is only applied to the left hand side of this comparison [-Wlogical-not-parentheses] if ((!type == FUNC || address || !opt_for_fn (decl, optimize_size)) gcc/expr.c:5271:9: warning: comparison of constant -1 with expression of type 'unsigned int' is always false [-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare] ../../gcc/expr.c:5271:9: warning: comparison of constant -1 with expression of type 'unsigned int' is always false [-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare] if (!SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN (target, ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There was a similar bug posted some time ago (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61271) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gcc/reload1.c:470:28: warning: incrementing expression of type bool is deprecated [-Wdeprecated-increment-bool] ../../gcc/reload1.c:470:28: warning: incrementing expression of type bool is deprecated [-Wdeprecated-increment-bool] spill_indirect_levels++; ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^ Seems like for this bug we need to change the declaration of bool this_target_reload::x_spill_indirect_levels to an int. Even the comment there mentions that this variable might take other integral values. /* Nonzero if indirect addressing is supported on the machine; this means that spilling (REG n) does not require reloading it into a register in order to do (MEM (REG n)) or (MEM (PLUS (REG n) (CONST_INT c))). The value indicates the level of indirect addressing supported, e.g., two means that (MEM (MEM (REG n))) is also valid if (REG n) does not get a hard register. */ bool x_spill_indirect_levels; -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gcc/rtlanal.c:5573:23: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) [-Warray-bounds] ../../gcc/rtlanal.c:5573:23: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) [-Warray-bounds] *second = GEN_INT (CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH (value)); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../gcc/rtl.h:1757:30: note: expanded from macro 'CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH' #define CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH(r) XCMWINT (r, 1, CONST_DOUBLE, VOIDmode) ^ ~ ../../gcc/rtl.h:1123:36: note: expanded from macro 'XCMWINT' #define XCMWINT(RTX, N, C, M) ((RTX)->u.hwint[N]) ^ ../../gcc/rtl.h:3193:51: note: expanded from macro 'GEN_INT' #define GEN_INT(N) gen_rtx_CONST_INT (VOIDmode, (N)) ^ ../../gcc/rtl.h:397:5: note: array 'hwint' declared here HOST_WIDE_INT hwint[1]; ^ ../../gcc/hwint.h:54:26: note: expanded from macro 'HOST_WIDE_INT' # define HOST_WIDE_INT long ^ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gcc/vec.h:1048:10: warning: offset of on non-POD type 'vec_embedded' (aka 'vec<c_expr::id_tab, va_heap, vl_embed>') [-Winvalid-offsetof] ../../gcc/vec.h:1048:10: warning: offset of on non-POD type 'vec_embedded' (aka 'vec<std::pair<expr_hash_elt *, expr_hash_elt *>, va_heap, vl_embed>') [-Winvalid-offsetof] return offsetof (vec_embedded, m_vecdata) + alloc * sizeof (T); ^ ~~~~~~~~~ /home/hiraditya/work/llvm/install-release/bin/../lib/clang/3.7.0/include/stddef.h:120:24: note: expanded from macro 'offsetof' #define offsetof(t, d) __builtin_offsetof(t, d) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- genrtl.h:435:3: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) [-Warray-bounds] ./genrtl.h:435:3: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) [-Warray-bounds] XWINT (rt, 1) = arg1; ^ ~ ../../gcc/rtl.h:1120:29: note: expanded from macro 'XWINT' #define XWINT(RTX, N) ((RTX)->u.hwint[N]) ^ ../../gcc/rtl.h:397:5: note: array 'hwint' declared here HOST_WIDE_INT hwint[1]; ^ ../../gcc/hwint.h:54:26: note: expanded from macro 'HOST_WIDE_INT' # define HOST_WIDE_INT long -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gcc/final.c:3957:8: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) [-Warray-bounds] ../../gcc/final.c:3957:8: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) [-Warray-bounds] if (CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH (x)) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../gcc/rtl.h:1757:30: note: expanded from macro 'CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH' #define CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH(r) XCMWINT (r, 1, CONST_DOUBLE, VOIDmode) ^ ~ ../../gcc/rtl.h:1123:36: note: expanded from macro 'XCMWINT' #define XCMWINT(RTX, N, C, M) ((RTX)->u.hwint[N]) ^ ../../gcc/rtl.h:397:5: note: array 'hwint' declared here HOST_WIDE_INT hwint[1]; ^ ../../gcc/hwint.h:54:26: note: expanded from macro 'HOST_WIDE_INT' # define HOST_WIDE_INT long ^ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gcc/cse.c:6171:38: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) [-Warray-bounds] ../../gcc/cse.c:6171:38: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) [-Warray-bounds] || (CONST_DOUBLE_P (new_rtx) && CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH (new_rtx)>= 0)) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../gcc/rtl.h:1757:30: note: expanded from macro 'CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH' #define CONST_DOUBLE_HIGH(r) XCMWINT (r, 1, CONST_DOUBLE, VOIDmode) ^ ~ ../../gcc/rtl.h:1123:36: note: expanded from macro 'XCMWINT' #define XCMWINT(RTX, N, C, M) ((RTX)->u.hwint[N]) ^ ../../gcc/rtl.h:397:5: note: array 'hwint' declared here HOST_WIDE_INT hwint[1]; ^ ../../gcc/hwint.h:54:26: note: expanded from macro 'HOST_WIDE_INT' # define HOST_WIDE_INT long ^ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gcc/gcov-tool.c:225:7: warning: variable 'ret' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] gcc/gcov-tool.c:493:7: warning: variable 'ret' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] ../../gcc/gcov-tool.c:225:7: warning: variable 'ret' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] if (argc - optind == 2) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../gcc/gcov-tool.c:230:10: note: uninitialized use occurs here return ret; ^~~ ../../gcc/gcov-tool.c:225:3: note: remove the 'if' if its condition is always true if (argc - optind == 2) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../gcc/gcov-tool.c:196:10: note: initialize the variable 'ret' to silence this warning int ret; ^ = 0 ../../gcc/gcov-tool.c:493:7: warning: variable 'ret' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] if (argc - optind == 2) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../gcc/gcov-tool.c:498:10: note: uninitialized use occurs here return ret; ^~~ ../../gcc/gcov-tool.c:493:3: note: remove the 'if' if its condition is always true if (argc - optind == 2) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../gcc/gcov-tool.c:462:10: note: initialize the variable 'ret' to silence this warning int ret; ^ = 0 I think I can fix few of these if we want them to be fixed. For some e.g. ( gcc/gcov-tool.c:225:7: warning: array index 1 is past the end of the array (which contains 1 element) ), I have no idea what is the proper fix for them. -Aditya > Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 21:57:08 +0100 > Subject: Re: Compiler warnings while compiling gcc with clang > From: jwakely....@gmail.com > To: hiradi...@msn.com > CC: pins...@gmail.com; renato.go...@linaro.org; gcc@gcc.gnu.org > > On 5 May 2015 at 12:39, Aditya K wrote: >> There are however, other differences between class and struct >> (http://stackoverflow.com/a/999810/811335) i.e., >> >> 1. In absence of an access-specifier for a base class, public is assumed >> when the derived class is declared struct and private is assumed when the >> class is declared class. > > Yes, everyone here knows that. That is only relevant to the definition > of the class, which can only occur once. For the purposes of > declarations that are not definitions there is no difference. > >> 2. class can be used in place of a typename to declare a template parameter, >> while the struct cannot. > > Completely irrelevant in this context. The use of 'class' in a > template parameter list has nothing to do with struct or class types, > nor forward declarations of struct or class types.
