------- Comment #13 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-31 02:55
-------
Given the kind of solutions we're looking at, I can't imagine this being fixed
for 4.0, and probably not even for 4.1, so I've set this to P4.
However, it seems sad to me that we can't find some efficient way to skip
statements after a return at -O0. If we really can't do that, then we ought to
think hard about whether or not we should be emitting this warning at -O0,
given that we want to do this warning via the optimization framework.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P2 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20681
