https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55767
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Yup, -Werror=return-type makes gcc reject the reporter's example:
$ /usr/local/bin/g++ -c -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -Werror=return-type 55767.cc
55767.cc: In function ‘int& foo()’:
55767.cc:3:13: error: no return statement in function returning non-void
[-Werror=return-type]
int& foo() {}
^
cc1plus: some warnings being treated as errors
$
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> It's not always possible to make it a hard error and refuse to compile the
> code. The function might call a function that never returns (but isn't
> marked with a noreturn attribute) or might be of the form:
>
> int& f(bool b) {
> if (b) {
> static int i;
> return i;
> }
> }
>
> If this is never called with a false argument there's no problem. If it's
> never called at all there's no problem.
>
> Unless GCC's flow analysis is improved I think the most you can hope for is
> enabling -Wreturn-type by default.
>
There's several bugs with -Wreturn-type I'd like to see fixed before enabling
it by default, for example, bug 55976, bug 68336, and bug 60440
> I use -Werror=return-type, the warning's there already, use it if you want
> it.
Since that works in this case, I'm closing this bug as INVALID.
