On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 17:21 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Mark Wielaard: > > > For some reason gcc might fail to recognize the assert (0) will never > > return and emit an implicit-fallthrough warning. Just add a break to > > silence it. > > Is this with -DNDEBUG? assert (0) expands to basically nothing in that > case. I'm not sure if we should change that. We cannot realistically > emit __builtin_unreachable in that case, I think, because it would make > writing incorrect asserts *really* risky with -DNDEBUG.
That might also trigger it. But in this case it seems like gcc simply doesn't fold away the if (expr) ... even though expr is clearly 0 and just warns about the whole statement. It is odd, maybe caused by this setup not using include files in the standard place? It just seemed simpler to just add a break then fight with it. Cheers, Mark
