lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: RFC: booleans and the kernel
From
Date
le ven 25-01-2002 à 09:00, Momchil Velikov a écrit :
> >>>>> "Alexander" == Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu> writes:
> >> > int main()
> >> > {
> >> > char x;
> >> >
> >> > if ( x )
> >> > {
> >> > printf ("\n We got here\n");
> >> > }
> >> > else
> >> > {
> >> > // We never get here
> >> > printf ("\n We never got here\n");
> >> > }
> >> > exit (0);
> >> > }
> >> > covell@xxxxxx ~>gcc -Wall foo.c
> >> > foo.c: In function `main':
> >> > foo.c:17: warning: implicit declaration of function `exit'
> >>
> >> I'm lost. What do you want to prove ? (Al Viro would say you just want
> >> to show you don't know C ;)
> >> And why do you think you never get there ?
>
> Alexander> I suspect that our, ah, Java-loving friend doesn't realize that '\0' is
> Alexander> a legitimate value of type char...
>
> Alexander> BTW, he's got a funny compiler - I would expect at least a warning about
> Alexander> use of uninitialized variable.
>
> That warning would require data-flow analysis (reachable definitions
> in this case), which is not enabled with certain levels of
> optimization.

Yes, the warning is enabled as soon as you start to optimize (-O1 and
more), which is often the case. And if you ask for warnings, of course.

Xav

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site