https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111654
--- Comment #2 from Julian Waters <tanksherman27 at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1) > (In reply to Julian Waters from comment #0) > > Created attachment 56022 [details] > > Patch to add invalid-noreturn to gcc > > Patches should be submitted to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org > > For more details, please read: > https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GettingStarted#Basics: > _Contributing_to_GCC_in_10_easy_steps > > Except for clang compatibility, I believe the consensus is that numerical > levels are not user-friendly. I think it would be better to have: > > -Wnoreturn-implicit-return > -Wnoreturn-explicit-return > > -Winvalid-noreturn enables / disables both. Yeah, I did try submitting it to gcc-patches, but it simply went ignored for forever, so I decided to submit the patch through the bug system instead, like others have done. I implemented it as numeric values to avoid inventing new names for -Woption and because it was easier to implement for a gcc beginner like myself, so worded warnings are likely to take me longer to implement
