https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87038
--- Comment #18 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #15) > (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #10) > > The initialisation (the call to f1) could have a side effect, but the > > a==1 case skips that. GCC is right to warn here in my opinion. > And warnings that are likely to trigger on > perfectly valid code that behaves exactly as the author intended shouldn't > be included in -Wall, per your own comment. No, that is not what I said. *All* warnings are likely to trigger on valid code, after all. I said "frequent false positives".
