Bug#341345: gcc-4.0: Please warn on impossible && conditionals

Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Please consider also warning on things like: > > if (0==c && 1==c) How would this be different from -Wunreachable-code? -- Falk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECT

Bug#341345: gcc-4.0: Please warn on impossible && conditionals

On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 01:26:50PM +0800, Paul Harris wrote: > I would imagine this below: > > > > > if (0==c && 1==c) > > isn't a good idea, because it would break symmetry with custom > operator==() behaviour. Okay, I'm no CPP guy though :) Is it a problem to warn in C, only? I know little

Bug#341345: gcc-4.0: Please warn on impossible && conditionals

Hi Justin, see lower ... Justin Pryzby wrote: Package: gcc-4.0 Version: 4.0.2-4 Severity: wishlist Tags: upstream gcc will warn on something like char c; // ... if (c>256) { // warning: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type // ... } Please consider also war

Bug#341345: gcc-4.0: Please warn on impossible && conditionals

Package: gcc-4.0 Version: 4.0.2-4 Severity: wishlist Tags: upstream gcc will warn on something like char c; // ... if (c>256) { // warning: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type // ... } Please consider also warning on things like: if (0==c && 1==c) -- To