Fix PR9624 by explicitly disabling uninitialized warnings for direct self-init:

  int x = x;

GCC disables its warnings on this construct as a way of indicating that
the programmer intentionally wants the variable to be uninitialized.
Only the warning on the initializer is turned off in this iteration.

This makes the code a lot more ugly, but starts commenting the
surprising behavior here. This is a WIP, I want to refactor it
substantially for clarity, and to determine whether subsequent warnings
should be suppressed or not.

llvm-svn: 128894

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/clang/test/SemaCXX/uninitialized.cpp b/clang/test/SemaCXX/uninitialized.cpp
index cf75187ab8e..0a3b5d938dd 100644
--- a/clang/test/SemaCXX/uninitialized.cpp
+++ b/clang/test/SemaCXX/uninitialized.cpp
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ int far(const int& x);
 
 // Test self-references within initializers which are guaranteed to be
 // uninitialized.
-int a = a; // FIXME: This doesn't warn!? Seems it doesn't cast 'a' to an RValue.
+int a = a; // no-warning: used to signal intended lack of initialization.
 int b = b + 1; // expected-warning {{variable 'b' is uninitialized when used within its own initialization}}
 int c = (c + c); // expected-warning 2 {{variable 'c' is uninitialized when used within its own initialization}}
 void test() {