Question

I'd like to see all the places in my code (C++) which disregard return value of a function. How can I do it - with gcc or static code analysis tool?

Bad code example:

int f(int z) {
    return z + (z*2) + z/3 + z*z + 23;
}


int main()
{
  int i = 7;
  f(i); ///// <<----- here I disregard the return value

  return 1;
}

Please note that:

  • it should work even if the function and its use are in different files
  • free static check tool
Was it helpful?

Solution

You want GCC's warn_unused_result attribute:

#define WARN_UNUSED __attribute__((warn_unused_result))

int WARN_UNUSED f(int z) {
    return z + (z*2) + z/3 + z*z + 23;
}

int main()
{
  int i = 7;
  f(i); ///// <<----- here i disregard the return value
  return 1;
}

Trying to compile this code produces:

$ gcc test.c
test.c: In function `main':
test.c:16: warning: ignoring return value of `f', declared with
attribute warn_unused_result

You can see this in use in the Linux kernel; they have a __must_check macro that does the same thing; looks like you need GCC 3.4 or greater for this to work. Then you will find that macro used in kernel header files:

unsigned long __must_check copy_to_user(void __user *to,
                                        const void *from, unsigned long n);

OTHER TIPS

As far as I'm aware there is no GCC option to give this warning. However, if you are interested in specific functions, you can tag them with an attribute:

int fn() __attribute__((warn_unused_result));

which would give a warning if the return value of fn() was not used. Caveat: I've never used this feature myself.

You can use this handy template to do it at run-time.

Instead of returning an error code (e.g. HRESULT) you return a return_code<HRESULT>, which asserts if it goes out of scope without the value being read. It's not a static analysis tool, but it's useful none the less.

class return_value
{
public:
  explicit return_value(T value)
    :value(value), checked(false)
  {
  }

  return_value(const return_value& other)
    :value(other.value), checked(other.checked)
  {
    other.checked = true;
  }

  return_value& operator=(const return_value& other)
  {
    if( this != &other ) 
    {
      assert(checked);
      value = other.value;
      checked = other.checked;
      other.checked = true;
    }
  }

  ~return_value(const return_value& other)
  {
    assert(checked);
  }

  T get_value()const {
    checked = true;
    return value;
  }

private:
  mutable bool checked;
  T value;
};

For C++17 the answer to this question changes since we now have the [[nodiscard]] attribute. Covered in [dcl.attr.nodiscard]:

The attribute-token nodiscard may be applied to the declarator-id in a function declaration or to the declaration of a class or enumeration. It shall appear at most once in each attribute-list and no attribute-argument-clause shall be present.

and

[ Example:

struct [[nodiscard]] error_info { /* ... */ };
error_info enable_missile_safety_mode();
void launch_missiles();
void test_missiles() {
  enable_missile_safety_mode(); // warning encouraged
  launch_missiles();
}
error_info &foo();
void f() { foo(); }             // warning not encouraged: not a nodiscard call, because neither
                                // the (reference) return type nor the function is declared nodiscard

 — end example ]

So modifying your example (see it live):

[[nodiscard]] int f(int z) {
    return z + (z*2) + z/3 + z*z + 23;
}


int main()
{
  int i = 7;
  f(i); // now we obtain a diagnostic

  return 1;
}

We now obtain a diagnostic with both gcc and clang e.g.

warning: ignoring return value of function declared with 'nodiscard' attribute [-Wunused-result]
  f(i); // now we obtain a diagnostic
  ^ ~

Any static analysis code (e.g. PC-Lint) should be able to tell you that. For PC-Lint, I know that this is the case.

a static analyzer will do the work for you, but if your code base is more then trivial prepare to be overwhelmed ;-)

A static analyzer will be your best bet here. We use Coverity here, but there are free tools available that you can use as well.

If you need a quick-and-dirty solution and you have a Linux-style shell handy, you can try something like:

grep -rn "function_name" * | grep -v "="

That will find every line that references the specified function but does not contain an "=". You can get a lot of false positives (and potentially some false negatives) but if you don't have a static analyzer it's a decent place to start.

The classic 'lint' program used to be very voluble about functions that returned a value that was ignored. The trouble was, many of those warnings were unwanted - leading to excessive noise in the lint output (it was picking up bits of fluff that you wanted it to ignore). That's probably why GCC doesn't have a standard warning for it.

The other issue - the flip side - is "how do you suppress the warning when you know you are ignoring the result but really don't care". The classic scenario for that is:

if (signal(SIGHUP, SIG_IGN) != SIG_IGN)
    signal(SIGHUP, sighandler);

You care about the first result from signal(); you know that the second will be SIG_IGN (since you just set it to that). To get away from the warnings, I sometimes use some variant on:

if ((old = signal(SIGHUP, SIG_IGN)) != SIG_IGN)
    old = signal(SIGHUP, sighandler);

This assigns to old both times. You can follow that with 'assert(old == SIG_IGN)'.

Licensed under: CC-BY-SA with attribution
Not affiliated with StackOverflow
scroll top