https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98217
--- Comment #9 from David Svoboda ---
The more I think about it, the more I want to see two -W warnings...one to flag
VLA declarations on the stack, and another to see *any* use of VLAs, even if in
something as harmless as a conformant array. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98217
--- Comment #5 from David Svoboda ---
Oops, the Clang bug entry is really here:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48460
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98217
--- Comment #4 from David Svoboda ---
Martin:
Thanks. It looks like -Wvla-larger-than=0 is (theoretically) a good way to
catch VLA stack declarations.
There is still the issue that GCC's -Wvla did not flag use of array[*]. To me
that is lower-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98217
--- Comment #2 from David Svoboda ---
I have also submitted a similar bug report to Clang, it is here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98217
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98217
David Svoboda changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||svoboda at cert dot org
--- Comment #1
: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: svoboda at cert dot org
Target Milestone: ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87581
--- Comment #8 from David Svoboda ---
A clarification:
The SSE2 instructions are not new. (20 years old)
Their use by the optimizer is (relatively) new. (between 4.8.5 and 4.9.4 from
my testing).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87581
David Svoboda changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: svoboda at cert dot org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 44825
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44825&action=edit
Crashing progr
