Hi
We have a number of do/while loops with NULL checks in their exit
conditions:
#include
static void f(const char *s) __attribute__((nonnull(1)));
int main(void)
{
const char *p = "X";
f(p);
}
static void f(const char *s)
{
do {
printf("%s\n",s);
s = NULL;
} while (s != NULL)
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:43:08AM +0100, Stefan Sobernig wrote:
> Under a recent gcc 6 [*], we run into -Wnonnull warnings using the
> nonnull attribute:
Yes, this warning has been enhanced for GCC 6.
> test.c: In function 'f':
> test.c:16:14: warning: nonnull argument 's' compared to NULL [-Wn
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:04:38AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:43:08AM +0100, Stefan Sobernig wrote:
> > Under a recent gcc 6 [*], we run into -Wnonnull warnings using the
> > nonnull attribute:
>
> Yes, this warning has been enhanced for GCC 6.
>
> > test.c: In func
On Tue, 16 Feb 2016, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Well, it's just that "s" has the nonnull attribute so the compiler thinks it
> should never be null in which case comparing it to null should be redundant.
> Doesn't seem like a false positive to me, but maybe someone else feels
> otherwise.
Please look
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:11:21AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:04:38AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:43:08AM +0100, Stefan Sobernig wrote:
> > > Under a recent gcc 6 [*], we run into -Wnonnull warnings using the
> > > nonnull attribute:
> >
On 15/02/16 17:36, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 15 Feb 2016 16:18, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
>> you as a group admin can do that, others cannot join
>> without creating a account at google (which requires
>> the acceptance of the google tos etc).
>
> that is annoying
i didn't know about list+subscr...@g
On 02/15/2016 06:34 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>>> What do you think about refactoring iterators in GCC 7?
>>
>> I think refactoring towards STL style iterators would be welcome. It
>> may be different for the actual instances though.
>
> Oh
I'm fixing a bug which involves initialization of a field of an object
in its placement new function before the constructor is called. This
is falling foul of DSE, which deletes the field initialization.
I see this:
@item -fno-lifetime-dse
@opindex fno-lifetime-dse
In C++ the value of an o
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 01:04:06PM +, Andrew Haley wrote:
> I'm fixing a bug which involves initialization of a field of an object
> in its placement new function before the constructor is called. This
> is falling foul of DSE, which deletes the field initialization.
>
> I see this:
>
> @i
On 02/16/2016 01:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > Can someone please tell me Chapter and Verse in the standard, please?
>> > Then I can close this one.
> I'd think [basic.life] describes this.
For the record, I found it in C++98 [class.cdtor]:
For an object of non-POD class type ... before the
On Tue, 2016-02-16 at 12:25 +0530, Prasad Ghangal wrote:
> Hi !
> I am trying to fix bug 38612
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38612).
> As mentioned in comment 4, I am changing warning message in
> typeck2.c. TREE_TYPE(datum) gives type as 'X', but I want 'X*'
I believe you want
Hi,
On Tue, 16 Feb 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
> > If anything, implement and use a range idiom like in D.
> >
> Could you please elaborate on that?
Motivation:
http://accu.org/content/conf2009/AndreiAlexandrescu_iterators-must-go.pdf
Detailed intro of the concept:
http://www.informit.com/a
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Matthijs van Duin
> wrote:
>> On 11 February 2016 at 16:31, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> struct A {
>>> static void foo (void) ();
>>> static int xxx;
>>> };
>>
>> What about it? It's an empty struct. (And it declares a f
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:24 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Matthijs van Duin
> > wrote:
> >> On 11 February 2016 at 16:31, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> struct A {
> >>> static void foo (void) ();
> >>> static int xxx;
> >>>
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:24 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Matthijs van Duin
>> > wrote:
>> >> On 11 February 2016 at 16:31, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >>> struct
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:24 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Matthijs van Duin
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> On
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Richard Smith
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:24 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri,
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:10 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Richard Smith
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:24 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Fri,
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:10 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Richard Smith
wrote:
> On Tue,
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:10 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Richard Smith
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16,
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:10 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Richard Smith
wrote:
> On Tue, Fe
Snapshot gcc-5-20160216 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/5-20160216/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Richard Smith
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:10 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Richard Smith
wrote:
> On Tue, Fe
24 matches
Mail list logo
