GCC 10.1 Released

Post by asveikau » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:49 PM UTC

rwmj wrote: post #37

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #2

I love the built-in static analyzer -fanalyzer option in gcc-10. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Static-Analyzer-Options.h...

Really? I tried to use it but I got a lot of false positives - in fact, every one of the errors in my medium-sized codebase was I believe a false positive. I spent a few hours last night looking at all of them and while I found a missing free, it was not one picked up by this analysis, but it happened to be in the same code that the analyzer flagged. Also the error messages are enormous in some cases. It does show po…

Post by rwmj » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

asveikau wrote: post #41

rwmj wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I tried to use it but I got a lot of false positives - in fact, every one of the errors in my medium-sized codebase was I believe a false positive. I spent a few hours last night looking at all of them and while I found a missing free, it was not one picked up by this analysis, but it happened to be in the same code that the analyzer flagged. Also the error messages are enormous in some cases. It does show po…

Looking at the categories of warnings it produces, I'm not surprised. When I've used similar tools trying to detect the same things, I also saw false positives. It's probably not an easy set of problems, otherwise we'd have it built-in to more tools and enabled by default.

Post by rumanator » Thu, May 07, 2020, 4:59 PM UTC

jcelerier wrote: post #27

klodolph wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think LTS entails, exactly? One of the core ideas of working with LTS is that you can build your software on an LTS release and ship it to somebody else on the same LTS release, either as a source or as a binary. If you want the latest GCC, that's fine, you're not forced to use the default compiler distributed with your OS. But it doesn't make sense to update the default compiler used in an LTS release. I…

> One of the core ideas of working with LTS is that you can build your software on an LTS release and ship it to somebody else on the same LTS release, either as a source or as a binary. Yes, and updating compilers don't prevent that at all. You can use GCC 10 to ship code that will build and run on Ubuntu 12.04 without issues. Xcode 11 can ship code that works back to macOS 10.6 and Visual Studio 2019 can still opti…

Post by MauranKilom » Thu, May 07, 2020, 5:00 PM UTC

    static const int π = 3;
    int get_naïve_pi() {
      return π;
    }

Post by pkolaczk » Thu, May 07, 2020, 5:12 PM UTC

verdagon wrote: post #36

pkolaczk wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Rust borrow checker requires special annotations and restrictions put on the code to do its job. This is a good thing, because it makes lifetimes and ownership explicit and visible in the code. It serves the similar purpose as type annotations in function signatures. > Or having multiple mutable pointers/reference to the same object Sure you can have that with `unsafe`. And this is a good thing, because multiple mu…

Can you explain why multiple mutable pointers is bad practice? I understand the benefits and the risks of them, and understand how Rust prevents both, but I dont yet understand why it's bad practice, and am interested to learn why.