Andrew Haley <aph@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 08/30/2011 06:14 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> Marc Glisse <marc.glisse@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >>> >>>> Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> >>>>> You could file an enhancement request in Bugzilla requesting that the >>>>> warning is disabled for the variable in the for-range-declaration. >>>> >>>> Personally I think this is the way to go. The variable is implicitly >>>> used, and the warning should reflect that. >>> >>> If C++ had allowed for(int:range) in addition to for(int i:range), >>> like you can abstain from naming function arguments, the warning would >>> have made more sense. As it is, I agree the warning should go, >>> although I don't know why you say the variable is implicitly used. >> >> The variable is implicitly used in the generated code: each element of >> the iterable is assigned to it in turn. Those assignments are likely >> later discarded as dead, but there is still an implicit use. > > But an assignment is considered a def (rather than a use) by that warning. > Isn't it? Hmmm, good point. Ian
