This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH] Fix PR21595

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>
Cc: Richard Guenther <rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 20:46:05 -0700
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PR21595
References: <4288B9AF.8020700@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0505162019390.27684-100000@www.eyesopen.com>

On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 08:36:42PM -0600, Roger Sayle wrote:
> My maintainer-sense is tingling that it may be preferable to add
> a "return 0;" at the end of main in this testcase.

Some idiot in the c++ commitee convinced the rest that, as a 
special case, falling off the end of main should be treated
the same as if it had a return 0.  Later, some (other) idiot
convinced the c commitee to copy the brain damage into c99.

It's a truely disgusting and totally useless rule.

r~

References:
- [PATCH] Fix PR21595
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PR21595
  - From: Roger Sayle

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