This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: missing return statement

From: Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>
To: James Dennett <james dot dennett at gmail dot com>
Cc: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>, Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>, Nathan Ridge <zeratul976 at hotmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:05:13 +0100
Subject: Re: missing return statement
References: <BAY110-W315A19B2ABDCCF5C4572FA969F0@phx.gbl> <49B9A12A.1070308@adacore.com> <18738acb0903122229x79567f1cv45b6646f021c3e17@mail.gmail.com> <49B9FD2F.80505@gmail.com> <18738acb0903122342s4c3da1cfif008d49b51469c2b@mail.gmail.com>

James Dennett <james.dennett@gmail.com> writes:

> This appears to be a difference between C and C++.  Unfortunate.
> 6.6.3 [stmt.return]/2 of N2800 says "Flowing off the end of a function
> is equivalent to a return with no value; this results in undefined
> behavior in a value-returning function."

Since it's merely undefined behavior the compiler cannot reject it,
because if the function is never called the undefined behavior does not
happen.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

Follow-Ups:
- Re: missing return statement
  - From: Dave Korn

References:
- missing return statement
  - From: Nathan Ridge
- Re: missing return statement
  - From: Robert Dewar
- Re: missing return statement
  - From: James Dennett
- Re: missing return statement
  - From: Dave Korn
- Re: missing return statement
  - From: James Dennett

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]