[Bug middle-end/111669] bogus -Wnonnull in conditionally executed code

["zfigura at codeweavers dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111669

--- Comment #6 from Zeb Figura <zfigura at codeweavers dot com> ---
It is my impression that gcc is interested in avoiding false positives for its
warnings. This isn't to say that there aren't some number of false positives in
existence, but it is my impression that gcc is interested in reducing that
number.

It is also my impression that -Wnonnull is not *supposed* to emit warnings for
cases where, from the compiler's point of view, NULL might be passed, but some
high-level invariant prevents this. Compare -Wmaybe-uninitialized, where the
documentation clearly specifies otherwise.

If both of these impressions are incorrect, this bug report can be closed as
WONTFIX.


(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #5)
> And you can tell the compiler some fact about the semantics of the Windoge
> API functions if you really need -Werror=nonnull (though I cannot see any
> reason you must use -Werror here):

If it makes a difference, please feel free to pretend I said -Wnonnull, rather
than -Werror=nonnull. It was merely a debugging aid, meant to help me try to
narrow down the conditions causing this error.