Subject: Re: Problems with lint(1)
To: Christos Zoulas <christos@zoulas.com>
From: Charles M. Hannum <mycroft@MIT.EDU>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 07/29/1998 20:37:08
> - how do we deal with ARGSUSED/NOTREACHED? It would be nice to
> be consistant and use a unified syntax for all lint annotations
> instead of having a mixture of lint comments and __attribute__
> statements.
The real issue with __noreturn__ is that it's also something that
compiler uses. Currently we `have' to use *both* __noreturn__ and
NOTREACHED to shut up different warnings in gcc and lint. This is
kind of silly. Indeed, if lint(1) did better flow analysis, I'd have
to put a NOTREACHED after *every* call to a __noreturn__ function in
order to keep it quiet.