On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 1:46 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 1/15/21 12:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 8:13 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> One aspect of PR 98465 - Bogus warning stringop-overread for std::string
> >> is the inconsistency between -g an
On 1/15/21 12:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 8:13 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
One aspect of PR 98465 - Bogus warning stringop-overread for std::string
is the inconsistency between -g and -g0 which turns out to be due to
GCC eliminating apparently unused scope b
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 8:13 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> One aspect of PR 98465 - Bogus warning stringop-overread for std::string
> is the inconsistency between -g and -g0 which turns out to be due to
> GCC eliminating apparently unused scope blocks from inlined functions
> that are
One aspect of PR 98465 - Bogus warning stringop-overread for std::string
is the inconsistency between -g and -g0 which turns out to be due to
GCC eliminating apparently unused scope blocks from inlined functions
that aren't explicitly declared inline and artificial. PR 98664 tracks
just this part