public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Christian Ehrhardt" <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, Subject: Re: c/8828: gcc reports some code is unreachable when it is not Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 08:16:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20021206161609.30581.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) The following reply was made to PR c/8828; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Christian Ehrhardt" <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de> To: reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, rcampbell@tropicnetworks.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: c/8828: gcc reports some code is unreachable when it is not Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:13:43 +0100 On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 09:29:12AM -0000, reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de wrote: > An even shorter example is the following: > > -----------------snip here---------------- > void foo(int i) > { > switch(i) { > case 0: > break; > case 1: > break; > } > } > -----------------snip here---------------- > > Compiling this with gcc 3.2.1 or mainline I get the message > > PR8828.c: In function `foo': > PR8828.c:7: warning: will never be executed > PR8828.c:5: warning: will never be executed Looks like warnings removed by the optimizer. In this case the optimizer will just remove both of the empty case labels and warn that the instructions therein (the breaks) aren't executed. In the original example the break is probably folded into the for loop an then optimized away. I even managed to get warnings for code like this: switch (i) { case 0: x++; break; case 1: x++; break; } where the optimizer tells me that it removed one of the x++ instructions probably because the two case labels were combined. This is probably not a bug, the documentation doesn't explicitly mention optimizations but it does mention that inlined function may produce warning for code that is unreachable only in a single inlined copy. This case looks rather similar. regards Christian -- THAT'S ALL FOLKS!
next reply other threads:[~2002-12-06 16:16 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2002-12-06 8:16 Christian Ehrhardt [this message] -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2002-12-06 17:06 Christian Ehrhardt 2002-12-06 15:56 Wolfgang Bangerth 2002-12-06 8:26 Rolf Campbell 2002-12-06 1:29 reichelt 2002-12-05 13:06 rcampbell
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=20021206161609.30581.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de \ --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).