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 82DFE3858C2C; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 08:12:17 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 82DFE3858C2C
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/92479] missing warnings for unreachable codes with break
 (i.e. revive the subset of -Wunreachable-code that fits under clang's
 -Wunreachable-code-break)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 08:12:17 +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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-92479-4-UBwsN1FNCR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-92479-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-92479-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 08:12:17 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D92479

--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021, egallager at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D92479
>=20
> --- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> > I'm going to re-interpret -Wunreachable-code-{return,break} to mean to
> > diagnose unreachable code _after_ a return stmt or a break stmt.  It re=
ally
> > looks like clang went out with a hammer, assigning a different option to
> > each diagnostic invocation with a different text ...
>=20
> I actually appreciate that about clang; additional warning flag granulari=
ty
> helps to break warning-silencing tasks down in to more-easily manageable =
parts
> when there are a lot of similar warnings. Sometimes I might want to only =
focus
> on one while saving the other for later.

I see.  Just in this case the choice to differentiate seems silly.=