On Sat, 23 May 2026 at 04:53, Jeffrey Law <[email protected]> wrote: > These warnings feel a lot more problematical than the uninit warnings. > Probably because uninit is a simpler problem. A false positive is > generally due to a missed optimization resulting in an infeasible path > in the CFG. For the array indexing, oob reads/writes we're talking > about we can get confused by aliases, vectorization, etc etc. There's > just a lot more that can go wrong than just an infeasible path in the CFG.
It's also *much* easier to just just initialize your data or add a pragma to silence an uninit warning, but the worst stringop/array warnings happen deep inside system headers, and are impossible for the layman to understand. Oh and also, the uninit warnings are split into -Wuninitialized and -Wmaybe-uninitialized and so **they do not lie to you**. It's a lot easier for users to understand that a -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning could be a false positive. The overflow warnings look scary and are hard to analyze and **they lie**.
