https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118004
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3)
> Making the entire ... access (read_only) would be incorrect, considering the
> argument corresponding to %n should be access (write_only) instead.
>
> So we s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118004
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118004
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118004
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Forgot to mention this is forwarded from
https://www.reddit.com/r/gcc/comments/1hbxudm/no_warning_when_using_uninitialized_local_variable/
.
