------- Comment #19 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-22 18:47 ------- (In reply to comment #18) > > so I am tempted to close this as fixed. > > At least PR 27289 and PR 29479 (marked as duplicate of this PR) seem still to > show the bug. >
They shouldn't be duplicates then. Here, the warning does not show up because CCP is assuming that the uninitialized value of b is 10. Thus, the return value is either 10 or 0 but never "uninitialized". PR29479 seems a duplicate of PR27289 (the latter seems a reduced testcase of the former). The warning shows up because: 1) SRA generates a PHI node that contains the uninitialized value 2) CCP is not working here. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5035
