www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 3127] New: 'unreachable code' warning destroys delegate literal type inference

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3127

           Summary: 'unreachable code' warning destroys delegate literal
                    type inference
           Product: D
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Keywords: diagnostic
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
        ReportedBy: clugdbug yahoo.com.au


D1 and D2. Compile with -w.
===========
void bar(real delegate(real) f) {    }

void foo() {
    return;
    assert(0);
}

void main() {
    bar( (real x){ return x; });
}
===========
Output with DMD1.045:
C:\dev>dmd -w bug
warning - bug.d(5): Error: statement is not reachable
bug.d(9): Error: function bug.bar (real delegate(real)) does not match
parameter
 types (int delegate(real x))
bug.d(9): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (__dgliteral1) of type
int
 delegate(real x) to real delegate(real)

On DMD2.030, the type is 'void' instead:
C:\dev>dmd -w bug
warning - bug.d(5): Error: statement is not reachable
bug.d(9): Error: function bug.bar (real delegate(real) f) does not match
paramet
er types (void delegate(real x))
bug.d(9): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression (__dgliteral1) of type
voi
d delegate(real x) to real delegate(real)

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 02 2009
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3127


Jarrett Billingsley <jarrett.billingsley gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jarrett.billingsley gmail.c
                   |                            |om




--- Comment #1 from Jarrett Billingsley <jarrett.billingsley gmail.com> 
2009-07-02 08:52:35 PDT ---
I'm not sure if this is valid, only because DMD treats warnings as errors, and
the code wouldn't compile anyway even if it didn't spit out the bogus
subsequent error.  I've had it spit out dumb semantic errors like this after
other errors, and errors after the first are usually not to be trusted anyway..

It's kind of like how DMD sets the type of invalid expressions to 'int' and
then marches on, giving you all sorts of dumb errors that don't actually mean
anything.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 02 2009
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3127





--- Comment #2 from Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au>  2009-07-03 01:09:08 PDT ---
I'm not sure if this is valid, only because DMD treats warnings as errors, and

subsequent error. If it were in the same function, I would agree. But in this case, I can't see _any_ reason for the error to propagate from one function to an unrelated one. It's an indication that something's wrong. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jul 03 2009
prev sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3127


Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED


--- Comment #3 from Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> 2010-02-01 00:01:03 PST ---
Fixed in D1 in DMD1.046, and in D2, sometime before D2.035.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 01 2010