From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4A7F3DA7.5070509@tecmav.com>
Date: Sun,  9 Aug 2009 23:20:39 +0200
From: Adriano Verardo <a.verardo@tecmav.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080829 SeaMonkey/1.1.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
References: <4A7F246E.8000504@tecmav.com>
	<dd6fe68a0908091246u4f0cb56fg4ed2bb4a8a4836ea@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <dd6fe68a0908091246u4f0cb56fg4ed2bb4a8a4836ea@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] Unexpected 8c warning message
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3f181b46-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Russ Cox wrote:
> 8c isn't smart enough to know that ...
>
>
It's a pity. In other - more complicated - situations I found such
warnings appropriate and very helpful.
Could that case be recognised during the variable-scope analysis on the
intermediate format (tuples ?) ?
I don't remember what D.Gries and others said about and I don't know the
8c internals at all.
It's just an academic question I do for cultural interest.
IMHO 8c is better than gcc even if sometimes it wrongly complains about
variables use.

adriano