Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Saturday 12 November 2005 20:57, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | > Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | On Saturday 12 November 2005 18:32, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | > | > Per Bothner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | A "function-never-returns-null" attribute doesn't seem like | > | > | the right mechanism. Instead, there should be a "never-null" | > | > | attribute on pointer types. A "function-never-returns-null" is | > | > | just a function whose return-type has the "never-null" attribute. | > | > | > | > We already have such mechanism: a reference type | > | | > | No. We've had this discussion before, and the conclusion what that | > | reference types can be NULL. | > | | > | http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-08/msg01463.html | > | > That simply means GCC got it wrong. | | If by "GCC got it wrong" you mean several key GCC developers disagree with | your opinion
Do you need to get it personal? | of what the semantics of REFERENCE_TYPE are/should be, then yes. See, it is not a semantics I made up. Even people arguing for null reference recognize it is undefined behaviour. -- Gaby
