On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Tim Mensch <tim-luajit@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From his original email: > > >> the '-g' makes the warnings disappear. > > ...so I would bet that the "-g" in fact made the suppressions file work. > John, if you want to verify that, you should try it WITH -g but WITHOUT the > suppression of that particular warning. If it comes back, then it's not that > -g is changing the code, but that -g is enabling symbols and therefore > properly suppressing the warning. > > Tim > Correct! I redid the tests with -g and no suppression file.. the invalid reads showed up again. I now understand that the suppression file depends on the visibility of those symbols. Thanks a lot for your help and the super quick replies! @Thomas: Thanks for the tip! There was no real problem, but I'm sure it will come in handy for me in other contexts. John