Re: Gcc warning instead of error
Re: Gcc warning instead of error
- Subject: Re: Gcc warning instead of error
- From: Steve Checkoway <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 13:44:29 -0700
On Jul 23, 2008, at 7:12 AM, Chris Jefferson wrote:
That last bit: "Many erroneous program constructs do not engender
undefined behavior; they are required to be diagnosed.", reads to me
as saying "If a program doesn not actually cause undefined behaviour,
you cannot reject it". Therefore an error could only be produced if it
could be proved the dodgy function call actually occurs, as unless the
function call actually occurs, I believe the program is valid (if
stupid).
I read that as "if erroneous, then diagnostic message." Certainly gcc
currently does that. It doesn't seem to say anything about whether it
can/cannot/must/must not terminate translation.
My understanding is that gcc is currently free to do anything at all,
even be inconsistent as long as if it decides to terminate
translation, then it issues a diagnostic message.
--
Steve Checkoway
"Anyone who says that the solution is to educate the users
hasn't ever met an actual user." -- Bruce Schneier
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden