https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115027
--- Comment #3 from Dr. David Alan Gilbert ---
(For my own keeping track, Jakub replied to that patch with a suggestion:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/Zwlg8VYJXQmEC65C@tucnak/ )
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|rguenth at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38486
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Summary|Missing warning.|Missing warning when
||reference is bound to
||converted temporary
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
Retitling to clarify. Would this go under a new flag, or an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29593
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
*** Bug 118386 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29593
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tower120 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29593
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||valiente.arthur at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29593
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-01-09
Severity|minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92936
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2dcb174385fd366282bf34bf95adbf918d5befda
commit r15-4792-g2dcb174385fd366282bf34bf95adbf918d5befda
Author: Sam James
Date: Thu Oct 31
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82529
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100717
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
This seems to work now, presumably the same as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96505#c2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100073
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.5|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115027
Martin Uecker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||muecker at gwdg dot de
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103637
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.4|12.5
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biene
||2024-06-15
Severity|normal |enhancement
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Component|c |middle-end
Blocks||87403
Summary|Missing warning for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115498
Bug ID: 115498
Summary: Missing warning for comparing distinct (char*)
pointers
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115096
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Explorer09 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115096
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
> the warning described in that bug is not occurring.
That is because in that case it had literally `(unsigned char**)&var` while in
this case it is spread across function calls and that would require a lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115096
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115096
Bug ID: 115096
Summary: -fstrict-aliasing miscompilation or missing warning
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115027
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115027
Bug ID: 115027
Summary: Missing warning: unused struct's with self-referential
initialisers
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94208
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113825
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113825
Bug ID: 113825
Summary: missing warning for omitted parameter names in
function definitions (c23 extension)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102558
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102558
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102558
Martin Uecker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||muecker at gwdg dot de
--- Comment #1 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53935
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110802
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Not sure why that didn't show up when I searched, thanks Andrew!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110802
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110802
Bug ID: 110802
Summary: Missing warning for attribute deprecated on a function
template definition with a previous declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.1
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110092
--- Comment #5 from Piotr Nycz ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> (In reply to Piotr Nycz from comment #0)
> > So, probably it is doable to add warning like: "bist/shared_ptr.h is an
> > internal header file, included by other l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110092
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> This seems more like a bug in the IDE than in GCC. If you don't include the
> header at all then GCC tells you the right header:
>
> sp.cc: In function ‘int m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110092
--- Comment #3 from Piotr Nycz ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> (In reply to Piotr Nycz from comment #0)
> > So, probably it is doable to add warning like: "bist/shared_ptr.h is an
> > internal header file, included by other l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110092
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #2 from Jonat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110092
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This seems more like a bug in the IDE than in GCC. If you don't include the
header at all then GCC tells you the right header:
sp.cc: In function ‘int main()’:
sp.cc:2:8: error: ‘shared_ptr’ is not a memb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110092
Bug ID: 110092
Summary: Missing warning that internal header is used
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100073
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.4|11.5
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109783
Bug ID: 109783
Summary: missing warning (due to a wrong suppression) when
va_end is not in the same function
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103637
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.3|12.4
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81745
--- Comment #16 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #15)
> (In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #14)
> > Even though GCC decides to add a newline to the logical file, so that the
> > missing diagnostic can be regar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81745
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #14)
> Even though GCC decides to add a newline to the logical file, so that the
> missing diagnostic can be regarded as correct, I think that an optional
> warning
efault, not that
`-pedantic` shouldn't warn: "I checked through the gcc manual, and didn't found
any option to suppress the warning message "no newline at end of file".
And PR 68994 was complaining about the missing warning.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81745
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81745
--- Comment #12 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #11)
> C99 seems to explicitly say, within Clause J.2, in the second bullet point:
This seems to be in C23 still.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81745
--- Comment #11 from Sam James ---
C99 seems to explicitly say, within Clause J.2, in the second bullet point:
>
>1 The behavior is undefined in the following circumstances:
>
>[...]
>A nonempty source file does not end in a new-line char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103637
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103637
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103637
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67906
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67906
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:177e93e95272e9b373203dee5b28d2b284ffa05e
commit r13-2099-g177e93e95272e9b373203dee5b28d2b284ffa05e
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67906
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
--- Comment #30 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 106456 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78155
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> I don't really see what existing warning this might fall under, except
> perhaps -Wchar-subscripts because isalpha and friend use the argument as an
> index into a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103637
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.0|12.2
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78155
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|missing warning on invalid |missing warning on invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100073
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.3|11.4
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81909
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91848
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|msebor at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83430
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|msebor at gcc dot gnu.org |
Assignee|msebor at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95485
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|msebor at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102934
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|msebor at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93518
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-12-23 00:00:00 |2022-1-19
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84544
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57503
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95485
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #3)
> Ah, yes, -Wpedantic does detect the invalid conversion. But few projects
> use -Wpedantic (GCC itself doesn't) and enabling the warning in -Wall or
> -Wextra woul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24016
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63809
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63809
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
template
struct binary_traits{};
template <>
template
struct binary_traits
{
typedef int result_type;
};
- CUT
This is rejected since GCC 8 with:
:6:8: error: too many templ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93518
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92937
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30368
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84573
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84573
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
|1
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-17
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Plus this is valid:
template
T g () { } // missing warning
template<> void g();
So having a return here would be invalid code and the warning might influence
someone to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84573
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84544
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||antoshkka at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84544
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Severity|normal
’
[-Wdangling-pointer=]
11 | f (1, p); // missing warning
| ^~~~
pr98901.c:7:9: note: ‘x’ declared here
7 | int x = 0;
| ^
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 63272 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103104
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-12-16
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98548
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
GCC started to warn for f() at r12-2793:
Move more code to new gimple-ssa-warn-access pass.
7;:
:16:15: warning: '__builtin_strcmp' argument 1 declared attribute
'nonstring' is smaller than the specified bound 8 [-Wstringop-overread]
16 | return 0 == __builtin_strcmp (p->a, p->b); // missing warning
| ^~
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103637
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103637
Bug ID: 103637
Summary: [12 Regression] missing warning writing past the end
of one of multiple elements of the same array
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
--- Comment #29 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 51895
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51895&action=edit
-Wunreachable-code-ctrl at GIMPLE lowering time
This is the -Wunreachable-code-ctrl (not enabled by -Wextra)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51878|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Bug 46476 depends on bug 103439, which changed state.
Bug 103439 Summary: genemit emits dead code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103439
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
--- Comment #27 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #25)
> Created attachment 51878 [details]
> -Wunreachable-code-return at GIMPLE lowering time
...
> At least this patch passes bootstrap and would have found one rea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
--- Comment #26 from Richard Biener ---
diff --git a/gcc/gimple-low.c b/gcc/gimple-low.c
index 18e66450977..dc56e14b605 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple-low.c
+++ b/gcc/gimple-low.c
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ typedef struct return_statements_t return_statements_t;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
--- Comment #25 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 51878
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51878&action=edit
-Wunreachable-code-return at GIMPLE lowering time
This is an alternative change only implementing -Wunreachab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 51877
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51877&action=edit
some fallout in GCC
This fixes some fallout appearant when bootstrapping with the patch, mostly
style, so not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 51876
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51876&action=edit
-Wunreachable-code at CFG construction time
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Bug 46476 depends on bug 80701, which changed state.
Bug 80701 Summary: Option for generating link symbol for functions removed by
DCE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80701
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gustavo.hime at mpimet dot
mpg.de
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103104
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103104
Bug ID: 103104
Summary: missing warning about superfluous forward declaration
-Wsuperfluous-forward-declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
1 - 100 of 769 matches
Mail list logo
