[cfe-dev] [PING][BUG] -Wunreachable-code not working

[Martin Galvan via cfe-dev]

2018-04-12 22:53 GMT-03:00 Artem Dergachev <noqnoqneo at gmail.com>:
> Such suppression might probably be made less brutal, but i'll be surprised
> if it were possible to get away with not having it at all. And it's pretty
> tricky to find deadcode before the preprocessor runs, when you're still
> capable of accidentally concatenating 'ret' and 'urn' into 'return'. So it's
> not the most pleasant problem to solve, and it's usually not that terrible
> when we don't give a warning (it's much less terrible than emitting a
> warning that's not actionable), so people usually make various suppressions
> for this sort of stuff.

Agreed, but wouldn't it make more sense that the dead code
identification happened after the preprocessor is done? I know nothing
of clang internals, that's just what makes sense to me.