From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 75531 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2018 03:36:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 74005 invoked by uid 89); 17 Jan 2018 03:36:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: eggs.gnu.org Received: from eggs.gnu.org (HELO eggs.gnu.org) (208.118.235.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 03:36:43 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ebeWl-0004hP-5H for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 22:36:42 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:53614) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ebeWl-0004hF-22; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 22:36:39 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2035 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ebeWk-0006qE-G8; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 22:36:38 -0500 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 03:36:00 -0000 Message-Id: <83wp0hw400.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Sergio Durigan Junior CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <87po69y20p.fsf@redhat.com> (message from Sergio Durigan Junior on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:36:22 -0500) Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 8.1 release branch created! Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <83h8rlyakm.fsf@gnu.org> <87po69zkxe.fsf@redhat.com> <87po69y20p.fsf@redhat.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-01/txt/msg00324.txt.bz2 > From: Sergio Durigan Junior > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:36:22 -0500 > > I'm not sure why this one is happening. I think it has something to do > with the fact that we're declaring "maybe_restore_inferior" as > gdb::optional, because scoped_restore_current_inferior's constructor > already takes care of initializing "m_saved_inf" (same goes for > scoped_restore_current_program_space). > > If that is the case, then maybe we can mark the "uninitialized variable" > warning for "m_saved_inf" and "m_saved_pspace". Sorry, I'm not sure I understand what does your suggestion here mean in practice. Can you elaborate, or show a proposed patch? Thanks.