Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
>In article <86tsrc8d0b.fsf@linuxsc.com>,>
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
[...]The C standard doesn't need to say that, for example, a>
function x() other than main(), whose name is never referenced,
will never be called. If someone wants to establish that x() could
be called, there needs to be a chain of reasoning going through the
semantic descriptions given in the C standard, to show that a call
to x() could occur.
Actually, no, a reference to a function is not necessary. A
couple of years ago, a well-publicized issue in a C++ compiler a
couple of years ago was something along the lines of this:
[...]
This is comp.lang.c. My comments were only about C, and not
about C++. But of course you already knew that.
I see you did not read the other messages in the (sub)thread,
but ok, here it is again, in C:
```
term% cat what.c
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) { for (unsigned int k = 0; k != 1; k += 2); return 0; }
void hello(void) { printf("Hello, World!\n"); }
term% clang --version | sed 1q
clang version 22.1.6
term% clang -Wall -pedantic -pedantic-errors -O1 -std=c23 -o what what.c
what.c:2:58: warning: for loop has empty body [-Wempty-body]
2 | int main(void) { for (unsigned int k = 0; k != 1; k += 2); return 0; }
| ^
what.c:2:58: note: put the semicolon on a separate line to silence this warning
1 warning generated.
term% ./what
Hello, World!
term%
```
- Dan C.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.