------- Comment #2 from madcoder at debian dot org 2006-12-01 22:45 -------
Please, I'm not telling the behaviour is crazy, it's indeed correct.
I'm just asking for a smallish warning that I may be shooting myself in the
foot when I do sth like my 'foo' function from the bug report.
When you do :
size_t i;
// ...
if (i >= 0) { ...
if (i < 0) { ...
gcc issues a warning to tell me that I'm doing a test that will always be true
(or always be false). I'd just like to have the same when I've specified that a
parameter is nonnull and that I nontheless tries to see if it's NULL or not.
You're not answering to what I ask, I've read the documentation, and I've
already acknowledged that gcc optimizations in presence of the nonnull
attribute are legitimate.
--
madcoder at debian dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30043
