https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78989
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm <dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Looking at the PRs you filed about the locations (PR78987 and PR78988), perhaps
the best approach here is for the location of the warning to be either this:
return (asan_poison_variables &&
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~
# 6 "gimplify.cpp" 3 4
__null
~~~~~~
);
or this:
return (asan_poison_variables &&
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
# 6 "gimplify.cpp" 3 4
__null
^~~~~~
);
i.e. for the location to be a range starting at the LHS start, finishing at the
RHS finish, with the caret at either the && or the RHS...
...and then for in_system_header_at to only reject the warning if *all* of the
range of the location is fully within a system header, rather than just
partially within a header?
