On 05/06/2014 01:31, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Finally, I have been able to update all tests with -Wreturn-type enabled >> by default. AFAIK, under GNU/Linux Debian Jessie 64 bits, there is no >> PASS->FAIL tests. >> >> Now, I would like to know if I can commit that into the repository. Who >> can review that? >> >> As attachment, you will find the actual (tiny) patch. >> >> I split the tests update by languages. As they are big ( 1260 files >> changed, 1638 insertions(+), 903 deletions(-) ), I uploaded the patches >> on my server: > > Some of those patches appear to be addressing cases where control appears > to reach the end of a function returning non-void, as opposed to cases > where the return type defaults to int. Do you have an example of the patches you are talking about?
> As I said in > <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-01/msg00207.html>, I don't think that > warning is appropriate to enable by default as it catches perfectly valid > C90 / C99 code that avoids using extensions to annotate noreturn > functions. I can try to implement that but I don't know where to start. Any clue? > (I *do* think it's appropriate to enable by default the warning about > return type defaulting to int - more generally, to enable -Wimplicit-int > -Wimplicit-function-declaration - and the -Wreturn-type warning about a > return statement without a value in a function returning non-void also > seems appropriate to enable by default. I can try to enable them too by default. It seems my patches are covering most of the tests updates. > Warning about the absence of any > return statement in a function returning non-void is probably also a > reasonable default warning from the -Wreturn-type set; it's specifically > the flow-based warnings that can give false positives in the absence of > noreturn annotations that I'm dubious about enabling by default.) You are talking about code like this one (from Jonathan Wakely) ? int f(int c) { if (c) return 0; function_that_never_returns(); } Initially, I implemented -Wmissing-return to manage this case ( https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00820.html ) but Jason suggested to remove that: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg01033.html (I don't have a strong opinion on the subject). Sylvestre
