https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29280
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #5)
> It seems like it should be trivial to enhance the warning by adding a note
> with the suggestion(s) mentioned in the request.
Given all the cases mentioned in PR25733, we should find a better way for users
to silence the warning. For example, by using an explicit cast.
Example:
int foo(int a, int b)
{
return ((a = b) ? 1 : 0); // <= missed warning.
}
warning: using the result of an assignment as a boolean expression
[-Wparentheses]
return ((a = b) ? 1 : 0);
~~^~~
note: add an explicit cast to bool to silence this warning
return ((a = b) ? 1 : 0);
^
(bool)
note: use '==' to turn this assignment into an equality comparison
return ((a = b) ? 1 : 0);
^
==
