From owner-freebsd-stable  Fri Jul 12 17:31:38 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A84B37B400
	for <stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 12 Jul 2002 17:31:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fafoe.dyndns.org (chello212186121237.14.vie.surfer.at [212.186.121.237])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DEC743E64
	for <stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 12 Jul 2002 17:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from stefan@fafoe.dyndns.org)
Received: by frog.fafoe (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 35C79272; Sat, 13 Jul 2002 02:34:56 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 02:34:56 +0200
From: Stefan Farfeleder <e0026813@stud3.tuwien.ac.at>
To: Chris BeHanna <behanna@zbzoom.net>
Cc: FreeBSD-Stable <stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: Re: GCC/header-related regressions on -STABLE
Message-ID: <20020713003456.GB238@frog.fafoe>
References: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0207111354090.22305-100000@pulcherrima.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <20020712201311.T39095-100000@topperwein.dyndns.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020712201311.T39095-100000@topperwein.dyndns.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-stable.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-stable>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-stable>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 08:13:50PM -0400, Chris BeHanna wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> 
> > standards/40084 and standards/40402 constitute significant regressions
> > on -STABLE, which definitely should be fixed for 4.6.1-RELEASE.
> >
> > Having three-line C++ programs like the following
> >   #include <iostream>
> >   #include <string>
> >   int main() { }
> > issue three(!) warnings with g++ -pedantic is A Very Bad Thing[TM],
> > especially on -STABLE.
> 
>     Should it not at least gripe that there's no return statement in a
> non-void function?

Both C++ and C99 treat main() specially: leaving the function's scope
without an explicit "return"-statement means that 0 is returned to the
implementation.

Stefan Farfeleder

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message