"Andrew Haley" <aph@xxxxxxxxxx> schrieb:
>On 10/26/2010 09:17 AM, ppmoore wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> We had an interesting error that was undetected in gcc:
>> {
>> unsigned long a;
>> unsigned long x=3;
>> unsigned long y=4;
>> a =
>> min(x,y);
>> }
>>
>> I've simplified the example. In the original code, the contents of
>the min()
>> statement were longer, so that it was on a separate line from the
>assignment
>> operation.
>>
>> Because of a bug, the assignment line was removed, and we had the
>following
>> code:
>> {
>> unsigned long a;
>> unsigned long x=3;
>> unsigned long y=4;
>> min(x,y);
>> }
>>
>> Should this be picked up as a warning/error?
>
>No, not unless you want a warning from every use of printf().
>
>Ignoring the return value of a function call is usual in C.
>
>Andrew.
Assuming min() is a macro or a pure or inline function, shouldn't gcc issue a "statement without effect" warning because it has no side effects?
