https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #17 from Roger Wolff ---
UI suggestion: Then start the selection box on "choose one" instead of a
default that probably doesn't get used often (like everybody else).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
When you choose RESOLVED you can pick various types of resolution, FIXED,
INVALID, DUPLICATE, MOVED, WORKSFORME etc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #15 from Roger Wolff ---
I marked it as "resolved', the system then told me to type a message and I did,
but then it had added the "FIXED" tag. Not my idea.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Roger Wolff from comment #11)
> Just FYI: I added -Wnull-dereference to my makefile of my real project. It
> doesn't trigger a warning in my project when I revert to the buggy code. The
> com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #13 from Andreas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
Roger Wolff changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #11 from Roger Wolff ---
Just FYI: I added -Wnull-dereference to my makefile of my real project. It
doesn't trigger a warning in my project when I revert to the buggy code. The
compiler does detect and act upon the null dereference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #10 from Roger Wolff ---
Technically correct.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Roger Wolff from comment #6)
> So, I've added "-Wall" to my Makefile to get ALL warnings,
It doesn't enable ALL warnings, as documented in the manual.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #8 from Roger Wolff ---
Please, start to read what is written. Please.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The compiler can't diagnose this as an error (unless -Werror* is used), because
it is only an error if such code is ever called at runtime, which the compiler
can't determine at compile time.
That is why it i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #6 from Roger Wolff ---
So, I've added "-Wall" to my Makefile to get ALL warnings, giving me the
biggest chance of finding bugs through the compiler telling me you have a bug
on line X of file Y.
So IMHO -Wnull-dereference should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #5 from Roger Wolff ---
Guys, The compiler found a bug in my code, but it didn't tell me. Like the if
(a = 3) situation, the compiler is correct when it compiles the code according
to the C rules.
I like to compile my code with -Wal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |9.3.1
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Roger Wolff from comment #0)
> So... without saying anything the compiler decided that my function will
> never return. It might be right about that (That's not true: This is on an
> embedded s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If FAIL is defined, your myfunc will always trigger undefined behavior if
called, and as such anything can happen.
Derefencing NULL is UB.
If you are on an embedded system where there is memory mapped, you ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96550
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Does -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks help?
17 matches
Mail list logo
