public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Blake <ebb9@email.byu.edu> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, Subject: Re: java/5941: incorrect "Unreachable statement" error Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 14:46:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20020325224606.1018.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) The following reply was made to PR java/5941; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Eric Blake <ebb9@email.byu.edu> To: tromey@redhat.com Cc: shroff@transeda.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, Per Bothner <per@bothner.com> Subject: Re: java/5941: incorrect "Unreachable statement" error Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 15:38:03 -0700 I raised this very question, nearly two months ago, to the Java Spec Report mailing list, but never received an answer. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/java-spec-report/message/636 I know that Neal Gafter, one of Sun's engineers, reads that list, so he may have entered my report on the Sun bug database, but I haven't seen any response on the matter. I can ask him further, to see what he thinks about the situation. My personal feeling about the situation: Saurin's example code should not compile, because it has an unreachable statement (the statement "return l2;" is unreachable according to JLS 14.20). However, I am inclined to treat the i++ statement is reachable, even if it is never executed. The JLS definitely has a hole in not specifing anything about the reachability of the i++, but both jikes and javac permit unexecuted ForUpdate statements. Tom Tromey wrote: > > Saurin> public class bug2 { > Saurin> public static int showBug2 () { > Saurin> for (int i=0; i <= 10; i++) { > Saurin> if ( i > 3 ) { > Saurin> return 10; > Saurin> } else { > Saurin> return 11; > Saurin> } > Saurin> } > Saurin> return 12; > Saurin> } > Saurin> } > > > Yes. It looks like the language spec is unclear on this issue. > I agree with that conclusion - the JLS needs clarification on ForUpdate statements, both in reachability, and in definite assignment. > > Saurin> What I would suggest that "Unreachable statement" should be a > Saurin> warning rather than error since it stops the compilation > > The language specification requires an error for unreachable code. Tom's right here - unreachable code must be a compile-time error, not a warning. -- This signature intentionally left boring. Eric Blake ebb9@email.byu.edu BYU student, free software programmer
next reply other threads:[~2002-03-25 22:46 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2002-03-25 14:46 Eric Blake [this message] -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2002-05-06 21:14 tromey 2002-04-25 11:47 tromey 2002-04-01 19:46 Per Bothner 2002-04-01 16:56 Tom Tromey 2002-04-01 16:46 Eric Blake 2002-03-25 13:26 Tom Tromey 2002-03-13 12:56 Saurin B. Shroff 2002-03-13 12:16 Tom Tromey 2002-03-13 11:36 shroff
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=20020325224606.1018.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=ebb9@email.byu.edu \ --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=nobody@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: linkBe 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).