[Bug c++/85714] New: -Wimplicit-fallthrough and nested exhaustive switch statements with enum classes and return

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: thomas.o...@pdv-fs.de Target Milestone: --- Nesting enum class switch statements which are exhaustive and whose cases all return produces a false positive

[Bug c++/85714] -Wimplicit-fallthrough and nested exhaustive switch statements with enum classes and return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85714 --- Comment #1 from Thomas Otto --- Created attachment 44098 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44098&action=edit -Werror=implicit-fallthrough false positive demo

[Bug c++/85714] -Wimplicit-fallthrough and nested exhaustive switch statements with enum classes and return

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85714 --- Comment #3 from Thomas Otto --- I thought forcing out-of-range enum values is no longer unspecified but now undefined behavior in C++17: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#1766 http://obiwahn.org/c++draft/expr.stati

[Bug c++/86485] New: [ 7 regression] "anonymous" maybe-uninitialized false positive with ternary operator

NCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: thomas.o...@pdv-fs.de Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 44382 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44382&action=edit Minimal

[Bug middle-end/61409] [6 regression] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false-positive with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61409 Thomas Otto changed: What|Removed |Added CC||thomas.o...@pdv-fs.de --- Comment #30