> On the other hand, if the pointer to the heap-allocated BHListSlice
> escaped, this would be a dangling pointer as well—just not the kind that
> the new GCC warning can report.
I don't agree here.
If with my patch it becomes a dangling pointer because we free it.
With Cedric patch it is a local variable that gets exited out of the
function that created it.
Choose your poison. One thing is bad and the other is worse.
Not sure which is worse—explicitly disabling a warning, at least, clearly says the compiler finds it iffy.
> So this patch is also doing nothing but shut up the compiler; but it's
> doing so in an underhanded manner and with a runtime cost, and as such it's
> worse than Cedric's patch.
Ok. I don't care (enogouh) about this to continue a discussion.. Can we
get Cedric patch upstream?
Yes I am sending the pull request very soon.
Paolo