From: Ramsay Jones Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 18:48:43 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cat-file: Fix an gcc -Wuninitialized warning Message-ID: <5154908B.1040801@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20130326193539.GB28244@sigill.intra.peff.net> Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 07:20:11PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote: > >> After commit cbfd5e1c ("drop some obsolete "x = x" compiler warning >> hacks", 21-03-2013) removed a gcc specific hack, older versions of >> gcc now issue an "'contents' might be used uninitialized" warning. >> In order to suppress the warning, we simply initialize the variable >> to NULL in it's declaration. > > I'm OK with this, if it's the direction we want to go. But I thought the > discussion kind of ended as "we do not care about these warnings on > ancient versions of gcc; those people should use -Wno-error=uninitialized". Hmm, I don't recall any agreement or conclusions being reached. I guess I missed that! > What version of gcc are you using? If it is the most recent thing > reasonably available on msysgit, then I am more sympathetic. But if it's > just an antique version of gcc, I am less so. (see previous email for compiler versions). I suppose it depends on what you consider antique. [I recently downloaded the "first C compiler" from github. Yes, that is an antique compiler! ;-)] I would call some of the compilers I use "a bit mature." :-P Hmm, so are you saying that this patch is not acceptable because I used a compiler that is no longer supported? ATB, Ramsay Jones