https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10837
--- Comment #29 from Lukas Grätz <lukas.gra...@tu-darmstadt.de> --- (In reply to Josh Haberman from comment #25) > As a result, I now agree with you that `musttail` addresses the complaint in > this bug. While it is odd and unexpected that `noreturn` will inhibit tail > calls, I agree that `musttail` appears to override this behavior, providing > an escape hatch for users who want tail calls on `noreturn` functions. > > It is somewhat unfortunate that this requires the attribute to be at every > call site, instead of on the `noreturn` function itself, but at least it is > possible. Having a musttail attribute on the signature of the noreturn function itself is probably not a good idea, if you think about it more. Take the function abort(): If you want to change the signature, you need to change the standard library headers. And if you wrote a noreturn function like temp2() yourself, it is still not a good idea to force musttail on it, I would say. Because this is a big restriction on how your function can be called. Another solution would be to add an optimization like -fno-proper-noreturn-bt. This option would globally overwrite the behavior and allow tail-calling noreturn functions. If you really have a convincing use case where such optimization is needed (I have none), file a feature request.
