https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34212
Pawel Sikora changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34212
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Liu 2012-03-16 13:38:18
UTC ---
Created attachment 26903
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26903
Test case
This test case gives a spurious 'warning: value computed is not used
[-Wunused-value]' mes
--- Comment #13 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-05-05 19:35 ---
queue.push_back with low prio ;)
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-24 09:09
---
My patch does not work as we now don't warn for +f(); which is wrong. I am no
longer going to work on this.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-13 05:30
---
Actually I was looking at the wrong testresults :). The build failed but I
think that was my machine acting up again.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-13 05:27
---
+FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wunused-9.C (test for warnings, line 32)
+f(); // { dg-warning "not used" }
+FAIL: g++.dg/warn/noeffect4.C (test for warnings, line 80)
const_cast (x.Foo ()); // { dg-warning "not
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-12 03:48 ---
I should be able to submit this patch tomorrow morning after the testing
finishes.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34212
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-23 20:35 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> ping^2
I am just finally getting back to my assigned bugs after so long, this is lower
down on the list than some other ones.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34212
--- Comment #7 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-02-23 20:33 ---
ping^2
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34212
--- Comment #6 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-01-08 19:00 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Mine, but this will not get in until around the 25th.
>
ping ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34212
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-03 03:17 ---
Mine, but this will not get in until around the 25th.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-25 03:10 ---
Confirmed, and here is a patch which really fixes the issue:
Index: ../../gcc/cp/cvt.c
===
--- ../../gcc/cp/cvt.c (revision 130402)
+++ ../../gcc/cp/cv
--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-11-24 18:50 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> A quick untested patch which I have not even tested on this testcase:
doesn't work.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34212
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-24 12:15 ---
A quick untested patch which I have not even tested on this testcase:
Index: stmt.c
===
--- stmt.c (revision 130381)
+++ stmt.c (working copy)
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-11-24 02:30 ---
the warning isn't emitted when i change ++r_ into r_++.
t.cpp.003t.original changes:
- (void) NON_LVALUE_EXPR < ++((struct X *) this)->r_> >>>
+ (void) ((struct X *) this)->r_++ >>>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
15 matches
Mail list logo
