--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-27
23:39 ---
*** Bug 23106 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-11
17:58 ---
Closing as invalid based comment #7.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-02
00:58 ---
*** Bug 20709 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20689
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-30
02:20 ---
Even the example you gave in comment #6 is hard to get unless you have flow
analysis in the front-end
which I really doubt is even going to be.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From varun0005 at gmail dot com 2005-03-31 10:18
---
please ignore previous code and consider this piece as example ... problem is
same .the exact programs are following and command line was gcc -Wall -O2
test1.c test2.cIn this why test1.c not giving warning b
--- Additional Comments From varun0005 at gmail dot com 2005-03-31 05:05
---
please ignore previous code and consider this piece as example ... problem is
same .the exact programs are following and command line was gcc -Wall -O2
test1.c test2.cIn this why test1.c not giving warning b
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-30
15:45 ---
Also this is not done because void* cannot be dereferenced.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-03-30 12:23
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I mean that since in case where you are doing "void *p=(void *)&i" then
> according to strict-aliasing rules we get " warning: dereferencing type-punned
> pointer will break strict-aliasin
--- Additional Comments From varun0005 at gmail dot com 2005-03-30 12:02
---
I mean that since in case where you are doing "void *p=(void *)&i" then
according to strict-aliasing rules we get " warning: dereferencing type-punned
pointer will break strict-aliasing rules" , but same thing i
--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-03-30 10:06
---
I don't understand what you mean. Please provide a *complete* test case,
with the command line you use and the output you get, and an explanation
of why you want a warning.
--
What|Removed
10 matches
Mail list logo
