public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/53232] New: No warning for main() without a return statement with -std=c99
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 12:56:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-53232-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53232

             Bug #: 53232
           Summary: No warning for main() without a return statement with
                    -std=c99
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.7.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: minor
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: vincent-gcc@vinc17.net


On the following program, GCC (4.4 to 4.7 at least) invoked with -std=c99
-Wreturn-type doesn't give a warning about the missing return statement.

#include <stdio.h>

static int i = 0;

int main (void)
{
  if (i++ == 0)
    printf ("%d\n", main ());
}

According to the C99 rules, it seems that the return statement is optional only
for program termination. Though this is ambiguous, someone else at least has
the same interpretation as me:

  http://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c/msg/c2f56fecfb699952

Before seeing this message, I posted

 
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c/browse_thread/thread/0187ef7b23bedf16

to comp.std.c (Subject: main function without a return statement in C99/C11).

Also, I think that the warning should be given in every case for the following
reasons:
* A missing return statement may be unintentional (I think that implicit values
like here should be discouraged in general, and that the C99 rule is there more
to avoid undefined behavior than to save space).
* Compatibility with C90 and with freestanding environments.
* It is difficult to guarantee that main() will not be called from another C
file.


             reply	other threads:[~2012-05-04 12:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-04 12:56 vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net [this message]
2012-05-04 13:44 ` [Bug c/53232] " manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-04 14:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-04 15:29 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-04 15:39 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-04 15:44 ` vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
2012-05-04 16:09 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-04 16:12 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-04 19:58 ` vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
2021-08-28 19:07 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-20  7:21 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-20 13:33 ` vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
2023-01-20 13:47 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-20 13:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-20 13:59 ` vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
2023-01-20 14:01 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-20 14:29 ` vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
2023-01-20 14:31 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-20 15:10 ` vincent-gcc at vinc17 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=bug-53232-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --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).