On 20/08/2014 00:02, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
It is indeed useless. I removed it. Thanks
http://sylvestre.ledru.info/0001-Enable-warning-Wreturn-type-by-default.patch
I don't think most of the testsuite changes in this patch should be
needed, and we
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
On 20/08/2014 00:02, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
It is indeed useless. I removed it. Thanks
http://sylvestre.ledru.info/0001-Enable-warning-Wreturn-type-by-default.patch
I don't think most of the
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
It is indeed useless. I removed it. Thanks
http://sylvestre.ledru.info/0001-Enable-warning-Wreturn-type-by-default.patch
I don't think most of the testsuite changes in this patch should be
needed, and we should be conservative about changing
On 14/08/2014 20:48, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
--- a/gcc/fortran/options.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/options.c
@@ -693,6 +693,10 @@ gfc_handle_option (size_t scode, const char *arg,
int value,
gfc_option.warn_line_truncation = value;
break;
+case OPT_Wmissing_return:
+
On 12/08/2014 19:48, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
The test Wmissing-return2.c only has one of the two warnings. But as per
-Wreturn-type = Run both, and for backwards compatibility with the
existing definition of -Wreturn-type, both warnings should
--- a/gcc/fortran/options.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/options.c
@@ -693,6 +693,10 @@ gfc_handle_option (size_t scode, const char *arg,
int value,
gfc_option.warn_line_truncation = value;
break;
+case OPT_Wmissing_return:
+ warn_missing_return = value;
+ break;
+
case
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
The test Wmissing-return2.c only has one of the two warnings. But as per
-Wreturn-type = Run both, and for backwards compatibility with the
existing definition of -Wreturn-type, both warnings should appear for this
test.
Make sense.
On 12/08/2014 19:48, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
The test Wmissing-return2.c only has one of the two warnings. But as per
-Wreturn-type = Run both, and for backwards compatibility with the
existing definition of -Wreturn-type, both warnings should
On 31/07/2014 00:08, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jul 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
Hello,
On 17/06/2014 19:41, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
OK. I will do that.
We should test the following:
* default = run just -Wreturn-type
* -Wreturn-type =
On Mon, 7 Jul 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
Hello,
On 17/06/2014 19:41, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
OK. I will do that.
We should test the following:
* default = run just -Wreturn-type
* -Wreturn-type = Run both
* -Wreturn-type +
Joseph, ping :)
(I know you were in holidays)
S
On 07/07/2014 19:17, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
Hello,
On 17/06/2014 19:41, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
OK. I will do that.
We should test the following:
* default = run just -Wreturn-type
*
Hello,
On 17/06/2014 19:41, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
OK. I will do that.
We should test the following:
* default = run just -Wreturn-type
* -Wreturn-type = Run both
* -Wreturn-type + -Wmissing-return = Run both
* -Wno-return-type +
On 05/06/2014 20:01, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Initially, I implemented -Wmissing-return to manage this case (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00820.html ) but Jason
suggested to remove that:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg01033.html
(I don't have a strong opinion
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
On 05/06/2014 20:01, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Initially, I implemented -Wmissing-return to manage this case (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00820.html ) but Jason
suggested to remove that:
On 17/06/2014 19:15, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
On 05/06/2014 20:01, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Initially, I implemented -Wmissing-return to manage this case (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00820.html ) but Jason
suggested to remove that:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
OK. I will do that.
We should test the following:
* default = run just -Wreturn-type
* -Wreturn-type = Run both
* -Wreturn-type + -Wmissing-return = Run both
* -Wno-return-type + -Wmissing-return = Run just the second one
* -Wno-return-type +
On 05/06/2014 01:31, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
Hello,
Finally, I have been able to update all tests with -Wreturn-type enabled
by default. AFAIK, under GNU/Linux Debian Jessie 64 bits, there is no
PASS-FAIL tests.
Now, I would like to know if I can
On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
Some of those patches appear to be addressing cases where control appears
to reach the end of a function returning non-void, as opposed to cases
where the return type defaults to int.
Do you have an example of the patches you are talking about?
Hello,
Finally, I have been able to update all tests with -Wreturn-type enabled
by default. AFAIK, under GNU/Linux Debian Jessie 64 bits, there is no
PASS-FAIL tests.
Now, I would like to know if I can commit that into the repository. Who
can review that?
As attachment, you will find the actual
On Jun 4, 2014, at 12:49 PM, Sylvestre Ledru sylves...@debian.org wrote:
Finally, I have been able to update all tests with -Wreturn-type enabled
by default.
Now, I would like to know if I can commit that into the repository. Who
can review that?
I’d like a C style person to review
On Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
Hello,
Finally, I have been able to update all tests with -Wreturn-type enabled
by default. AFAIK, under GNU/Linux Debian Jessie 64 bits, there is no
PASS-FAIL tests.
Now, I would like to know if I can commit that into the repository. Who
can
On 01/16/2014 02:44 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
To avoid spurious warnings on code with infinite loops we could add a
simple check for infinite loops and suppress the warning in that case.
Basically, if we see a loop with an always-true condition and no breaks.
Like so:
Tested
On 23/01/2014 10:48, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/16/2014 02:44 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
To avoid spurious warnings on code with infinite loops we could add a
simple check for infinite loops and suppress the warning in that case.
Basically, if we see a loop with an always-true condition and no
On 16/01/2014 11:44, Jason Merrill wrote:
My preference would be to turn -Wreturn-type on by default, but not
create the separate -Wmissing-return flag. As I argued in 2002, there
should only be one flag.
I don't have any opinion on the subject. The separate option or not is
fine with me. I am
My preference would be to turn -Wreturn-type on by default, but not
create the separate -Wmissing-return flag. As I argued in 2002, there
should only be one flag.
To avoid spurious warnings on code with infinite loops we could add a
simple check for infinite loops and suppress the warning in
2013/12/21 Sylvestre Ledru sylves...@debian.org:
Hello
Following this thread http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-11/msg00260.html
and this bug,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55189
I would like to propose the two following patches:
I am activating -Wreturn-type by defaut and add
Chung-Wu wrote:
But I notice your ChangeLog formatting is not correct.
You can refer to other entries in ChangeLog to refine yours,
and then resubmit the patch for review. :)
Or - use contrib/mklog to autogenerate template ChangeLog for you.
-Y
27 matches
Mail list logo
