https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44081
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44081
--- Comment #14 from Hugo van der Sanden ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #13)
> Should we close this?
With what status?
I think it should at least be updated to CONFIRMED, based on the comments from
valeriy.
I should note als
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44081
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44081
--- Comment #12 from Valeriy 2011-01-20 18:23:29 UTC ---
/*attr_nn.c*/
#include
static void attr_nn(int i1, int *i2, int *i3) __attribute__((__nonnull__(2)));
static void attr_nn(int i1, int *i2, int *i3) {
*i2 = i1;
if (i3 ==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44081
Valeriy changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nordq at ya dot ru
--- Comment #11 from Valeriy
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-05-12 11:52
---
Subject: Re: Incorrect nonnull assumed in code generation
On Wed, 12 May 2010, pmoulder at mail dot csse dot monash dot edu dot au wrote:
> Coming back to memcpy etc.: As this is such an edge case, I'll give mor
--- Comment #9 from hv at crypt dot org 2010-05-12 10:54 ---
The direction of discussion has centred so far on the documentation, but as far
as I can tell the only point at which the documentation confused someone was
the triage at #3. Should there not be a separate bug opened for proble
--- Comment #8 from pmoulder at mail dot csse dot monash dot edu dot au
2010-05-12 09:25 ---
OK, on careful reading, I agree re memcpy etc. (see below).
Consequently, I amend my suggested change to the documentation to:
- Add a sentence about implicit `this' argument (copied & paste
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-12 06:25 ---
I can't reproduce the problem either, neither in 4.6 nor in 4.4. 4.5.0 (rather
than current 4.5 snapshots) had a bug with nonnull attribute if a function is
IPA optimized and some arguments are optimized out, but I do
--- Comment #6 from pmoulder at mail dot csse dot monash dot edu dot au
2010-05-12 05:29 ---
Part of the problem is a documentation bug: the nonnull attribute's parameter
is named "arg-index", suggesting that the first parameter is 0, while the
example strongly suggests that the first p
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-11 22:59 ---
Works for me with:
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 4.6.0 20100427 (experimental) [trunk revision
158795]"
on x86_64 with -m32 -O2 -fno-inline.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
11 matches
Mail list logo
