From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2024 20:01:40 +0000 (+0200)
Subject: doc: Remove dubious example around bug reporting
X-Git-Tag: basepoints/gcc-16~7670
X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=a28046e215307cf11c7a133c8b33dc0c0bcf74ec;p=thirdparty%2Fgcc.git

doc: Remove dubious example around bug reporting

gcc:
	* doc/bugreport.texi (Bug Criteria): Remove dubious example.
---

diff --git a/gcc/doc/bugreport.texi b/gcc/doc/bugreport.texi
index b7cfb5dd6ae..7a603241f77 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/bugreport.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/bugreport.texi
@@ -50,11 +50,6 @@ However, you must double-check to make sure, because you may have a
 program whose behavior is undefined, which happened by chance to give
 the desired results with another C or C++ compiler.
 
-For example, in many nonoptimizing compilers, you can write @samp{x;}
-at the end of a function instead of @samp{return x;}, with the same
-results.  But the value of the function is undefined if @code{return}
-is omitted; it is not a bug when GCC produces different results.
-
 Problems often result from expressions with two increment operators,
 as in @code{f (*p++, *p++)}.  Your previous compiler might have
 interpreted that expression the way you intended; GCC might