> Not a bad idea, but in many situations, I am compiling a large > project whose code generates many warnings, and turning them all > into errors would be unworkable. Use -Werror with only the specific warning option (-Wreturn-type) turned on. Fix the warnings, remove -Werror and add back in the other warning options. > I have patched my copy of the gcc sources to turn this warning > into an error, but I'm still curious to see an example of when it > is useful to knowingly allow the control flow to leave a function > with an undefined return value. There could be a function with a control flow that returns something useful in one path and something meaningless in another. Or a function calls another function that never returns (exit example). It is more important for a compiler to follow the language standard and accept valid source than it is to have a compiler that tries to enforce good programming practises and design. There are plenty of static analysis tools for checking c programs available (lint/splint/etc). Regards, Ryan Mansfield
