------- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-19 13:56 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> >I agree with you Paolo. The front-end should make sure that its
> > artefacts don't adversily affect diagnostics we emit.
>
> I agree to some extend. The reason why the try/catch is there is because of
> what the C++ standard says should happen and not really an artafact of what
> the
> GCC is doing really. When I first say this bug I was going to say this should
> not warned about, but when I looked into it a little more, I was thinking the
> warning is correct except for the fact, there is no way of working around the
> issue.
>
> I think we need to decide what -Wunreachable-code actually means, does it mean
> if there is a way to "fix" the code, then warn about unreachable code or does
> it mean to warn about code which is even hard to work around like in templates
> and constructors?
>
And I think that we should not warn about generated code. No matter if it is
generated by optimisers or front-ends. If it is not user code, then there
should be no warning. In that sense, this is similar to PR31227.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31246
