public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/36254] wrong "control reaches end of non-void function" warning
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:36:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081027143506.23499.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-36254-7667@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #11 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-10-27 14:35 -------
(In reply to comment #10)
> Language specific tree codes are allowed until the gimplification is done,
> the cp_gimplify_expr langhook takes care of either rewriting the lang specific
> tree code into GENERIC (COND_EXPR in this case), or tuplifying it right away.

If they are permitted, they should be handled. If they are not handled, we
should fail to compile or crash. Currently we just ignore them, which works ok
for C since generic is basically C but fails for everything else.

> BTW, looking at the other testcase, block_may_fallthru certainly isn't able
> to say whether a SWITCH_EXPR can fall thru or not, and it wouldn't be actually
> very easy.  So perhaps we either need to run some pass that kills obvious dead
> code before reporting the "control reaches end" warnings, or really try harder
> during gimplification to figure out these cases and optimize it at that point.

So basically you propose to do optimizations at -O0. I still do not understand
what is the problem with setting no_warning. This is *really*
compiler-generated code.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36254


  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-10-27 14:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-17  9:54 [Bug c++/36254] New: " pluto at agmk dot net
2008-05-17  9:55 ` [Bug c++/36254] " pluto at agmk dot net
2008-05-17  9:55 ` pluto at agmk dot net
2008-05-17 11:14 ` pluto at agmk dot net
2008-05-17 12:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-25 19:21 ` pluto at agmk dot net
2008-08-25 11:17 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-10-22 18:21 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-10-27 12:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-10-27 12:43 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-10-27 14:06 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-10-27 14:36 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2008-12-28  3:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-12-28  3:36 ` [Bug c++/36254] [4.2/4.3/4.4 Regression] wrong "control reaches end of non-void function" warning with IF_STMT pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-12-29 21:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-01-11 21:15 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-01-11 21:33 ` [Bug c++/36254] [4.2/4.3 " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-02-14 10:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-03-31 20:51 ` [Bug c++/36254] [4.3 " jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-08-04 12:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-05-22 18:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-02 16:23 ` pluto at agmk dot net

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20081027143506.23499.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).