From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id E96863858C50; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 15:10:47 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E96863858C50
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1674227447;
	bh=TGEeYlyk23rWi3V1QkpN4MLstWcYTDiAJN8EP69Vu4U=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=lL0EyAqcLbDs1R+zihBzdQAyxHAzGnklvlwGwZLwSlsfCV2Q/EAj9FQGxKXENNZCy
	 ZqXF1ZTdDbrNj5C6Tf4Jc6SoMt55atorFmUFHib4wZ2fYN95BtPJgDGTT26IKXgCHm
	 6crvGF0r6P6yNOyJZNK9qyQTAAebdpAHMHfwJjOw=
From: "vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/53232] No warning for main() without a return statement with
 -std=c99
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 15:10:47 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-53232-4-lJIiewC8wd@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-53232-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-53232-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D53232

--- Comment #18 from Vincent Lef=C3=A8vre <vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net> -=
--
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #17)
> Yeah, but warnings with high false positivity rates at least shouldn't be=
 in
> -Wall.

Well, there already is -Wunused, which is included in -Wall (such warnings =
may
typically be emitted due to #if and also in temporary code when debugging),=
 and
-Wsign-compare in C++.

Anyway, there is a first issue: the warning is inexistent, even with -Wextr=
a.
There is a second issue: the warning is not emitted with -Wreturn-type when
there is a call to main(). Solving these two issues alone would not yield a
high false positivity rate with -Wall. (That said, I think that developers
should be encouraged to have an explicit "return" for main(); in particular,
this is really easy to do and improves the code readability, specially know=
ing
the difference of behavior with other languages, such as shell scripts and
Perl.)=