Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6255913
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 24, 20262026-05-24T14:27:10+00:00 2026-05-24T14:27:10+00:00

Turns out that g++ compiler (used in Qt Creator by default) gives a mere

  • 0

Turns out that g++ compiler (used in Qt Creator by default) gives a mere warning if you don’t have return statement in the non-void function, i.e.:

int* create_array(int n)
{
    int* a = new int[n];
}

compiles fine.

This behavior is subject to countless bug reports on g++ itself, but looks like developers consider this behavior conforming to C++ standard (which is debatable, cause it’s a bit confusing in this part) as stated at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43943 :

Flowing off the end of a function is equivalent to a return with no value; 
this results in undefined behavior in a value-returning function.

However, the very same paragraph begins with:

  A return statement without an expression can be used only in functions 
  that do not return a value, that is, a function with the return type void,
  a constructor (12.1), or a destructor (12.4).

So aside from these (un)holy wars over the standard interpretation are there any options to make Qt flag this as an error at compile time?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-24T14:27:13+00:00Added an answer on May 24, 2026 at 2:27 pm

    This is not related to Qt but to g++.

    In the build options, simply add the flag -Werror and g++ will consider any warning as error. You may also need to use flag -Wall to make g++ generate additional warnings, as it doesn’t generate warnings for missing return statements (and many other situations) by default. There’s no way to tune this setting on a per-warning basis however, so it’s either everything or nothing.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have an application that uses RPC for interprocess communications. Turns out that synchronous
I'm new, so sorry if this turns out so simple that I should have
It turns out that in order to do this one has to bind the
http://leepoint.net/notes-java/data/expressions/22compareobjects.html It turns out that defining equals() isn't trivial; in fact it's moderately hard
I resolved this issue myself. It turns out that the activation framework requires some
I wrote a small app that turns out to be using a lot of
SOLVED: As it turns out, my problem was rooted in the fact that I
My program has been working perfectly so far, but it turns out that I've
Turns out it is perfectly valid for a C++ compiler to emit different machine
Update: Turns out that this is a duplicate of: JSLint: Using a function before

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.