[Bug c/10170] No warning for "if(foo)" instead of "if(foo())"

["gdr at integrable-solutions dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10170



------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net  2003-07-18 23:28 -------
Subject: Re:  No warning for "if(foo)" instead of "if(foo())"

"dhazeghi at yahoo dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:


| Still on mainline. I wouldn't mind a feature like this either...

I don't understand what you want the compiler to do with this.
If it a common idiom to write

    if (foo)
       do-something-with-foo(args);

especially with weak linkage.  See Glibc source for example.
On the other hand it is also quite common to see codes like

  if (ENABLE_CHECKING)
     do-some-debug-mode-stuff  

(where ENABLE_CHECKING is a constant expression either 0 ou 1).
Surely we don't want to ouput noise on those constructs.

I'm going to close this PR.

-- Gaby