This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Bug c/10170] No warning for "if(foo)" instead of "if(foo())"
- From: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
- To: gdr at integrable-solutions dot net <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Cc: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 17:07:04 +0100
- Subject: Re: [Bug c/10170] No warning for "if(foo)" instead of "if(foo())"
- References: <20030320182600.10170.xkinh@yahoo.com> <20030719152447.22067.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
gdr at integrable-solutions dot net wrote:-
> | it. I just hope the GCC compiler, if it's possible,
> | will give a warning message as other compilers do, so
> | users could see their mistakes. This warning is the
> | same warning of :
> | if ( a_number = another_number)
>
> I don't think so.
> And for that warning, we got existing practice. For
>
> if(foo)
>
> we've already got existing pratice the other way around.
For the case that foo is a function name, which is what this whole PR
is about, it's very rare. I don't remember ever having had the need to
write such a line.
Regardless, I don't think it was appropriate to close this PR. It
could be treated as a fully justifiable request for a new -W option.
Neil.