On May 3, 2013, at 00:15, reed kotler <rkot...@mips.com> wrote: > There was some confusion on the llvm list because some tests were run on > targets that did not support the naked attribute. > > I think we are thinking now that the return statement should not be emitted > unless explicitly requested. > > It's not totally clear in the gcc manual so that is why I was asking.
I clearly is an error to have a function that doesn't return. So, what you really asking is: "What are the semantics of a (naked) functon that doesn't return?" I think it would make sense for a compiler to emit a special error-return (such as abort()) at the end of such a function, with the expectation that this code usually would be unreachable and optimized away. I don't think it makes sense to try and define any other semantics for a funciotn that doesn't explicitly return a value. -Geert
