From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9983: valgrind warning in draw_glyphs Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 17:54:56 +0200 Message-ID: <83wrbchqr3.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1320681507 4141 80.91.229.12 (7 Nov 2011 15:58:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:58:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dann@gnu.org, 9983@debbugs.gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 07 16:58:23 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RNRaY-00051S-M7 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 16:58:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58202 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RNRaY-00031Q-9M for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:58:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45441) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RNRaR-0002uM-Tp for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:58:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RNRaM-0003Pd-6R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:58:15 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:60903) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RNRaM-0003PX-4u for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:58:10 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RNRd7-0000uP-Re for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:01:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 16:01:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9983 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9983-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9983.13206816443464 (code B ref 9983); Mon, 07 Nov 2011 16:01:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9983) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Nov 2011 16:00:44 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RNRcm-0000tj-GY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:00:44 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RNRcg-0000tW-G4 for 9983@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:00:38 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LUA00B00S59R500@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 9983@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 17:56:58 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.70.69]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LUA00BZNSAX3I70@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 17:56:58 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:01:01 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:53661 Archived-At: > From: Andreas Schwab > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 9983@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 13:59:37 +0100 > > Dan Nicolaescu writes: > > > so it looks like check_mouse_face is tested after mouse_beg_col. > > That is perfectly ok under the as-if rule. See also > . Where can I find the definition of the "side effects" that would disallow such optimizations?