https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94768
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94768
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #3)
> Most of the time, it is in its own GNU mode and so could do a more
> useful job here rather than IMHO blindly following non-useful standards.
Nobody is "blin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94768
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #3)
> I checked the source code of the popular Fedora Linux distribution.
> There are 32 examples of this problem in the C++ code, so they will
> need fixing.
>
> In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94768
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> (In reply to David Binderman from comment #0)
> > IMHO, for a C++ function returning non-void, a complete absence of any
> > return statement in the function re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94768
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> This is a valid C++ program and it would be non-conforming to reject it.
Surprising. The standard looks broken to me. Standards conformance
only really matte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94768
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> This is a valid C++ program
s/program/translation unit/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94768
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
