On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <jord...@octave.org> wrote: > 2012/4/30 Michael Goffioul <michael.goffi...@gmail.com>: >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso >> <jord...@octave.org> wrote: >>> On 29 April 2012 19:42, Claudio Freire <klaussfre...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Here[0] is a patch that makes octave-forge build under gcc 4.7 and >>>> another[1] for openmpi 1.5. >>> >>> Thanks. I looked at your modifications, and they mostly seem safe for >>> earlier versions of gcc. Did 4.7 now decide that no return in non-void >>> functions is now an error, not just a warning? Is this standard >>> behaviour? I'm just curious. >> >> MSVC has been reporting that kind of error for years. I always have to >> "fix" these to make code compilable. Personally, I'd indeed consider a >> non-void function without a return statement as an error. > > Sure, of course it should be fixed[1], I'm just curious to know why > gcc ever allowed this. For example, is it allowed behaviour in C, and > gcc's C++ implementation inherited this? > > - Jordi G. H. > > [1] and why didn't you submit a patch yourself, after all these years? :-(
Because MSVC is not part of the officially supported compilers for octave. Michael. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
