https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #7)
> > Not sure if these are dupes or not (would we want a non-analyzer
> > implementation of this warning?)
>
> Do we want a non-analyzer implementation of this warn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #5)
> I hadn't seen this, and I filed PR analyzer/99671 last year to track adding
> a -fanalyzer warning for this. I now have a mostly-working implementation
> of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5c6546ca7d8cab1f1c129f5b55f709e2ceee0f94
commit r13-3884-g5c6546ca7d8cab1f1c129f5b55f709e2ceee0f94
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This needs data flow as the front-end has no way to process *a and then a.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRME
