Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Check for function results
Message-ID: <6729@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 25-Nov-87 16:24:06 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6729
Posted: Wed Nov 25 16:24:06 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 29-Nov-87 09:47:34 EST
References: <10530@brl-adm.ARPA>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) )
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 16

In article <10530@brl-adm.ARPA> I1090801%DBSTU1.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU writes:
>... I think it isn't easy for a compiler to see all this
>at compile-time, ...

No, whether or not a function execution ends with an explicit
"return ;" statement is not difficult to determine
at compile time, and all such statically-determinable usage
errors should be detected by the compiler/linker, not at run
time.

Producing a correct implementation of C from scratch is a
difficult project; it is much better for most purposes to
port some version of AT&T's Portable C Compiler than to have
to rediscover all the details of how to compile the language.
If the goal is an ANSI/ISO conformant implementation of C, I
would say it's too big a project for one person.