Patch to detect invalid and missing ATTRIBUTE const/pure [take 2]

Fergus Henderson
Mon Mar 25 13:22:00 GMT 2002

On 25-Mar-2002, Kaveh R. Ghazi <> wrote:
> 2.  I would have thought that foo_p1/foo_c1/foo_p2/foo_c2 would all be
>     suggested candidates for either pure or const.  None of them are.
>     Is it not the case that a "pure" or "const" function may call
>     another respectively "pure" or "const" function?

Well, the issues with looping could also arise with recursion...

Fergus Henderson <>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.

More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list