That actually made sense. I just wanted to point out that for me, C is more for embedded code, where modifying random parts of memory is a common task. So sayi

That actually made sense. I just wanted to point out that for me, C is more for embedded code, where modifying random parts of memory is a common task. So saying that a function that filled a pointer, used it to reset or set some parts of memory can be removed just because it does not have a return seems a bit extreme, but I agree that it is allowed. I often see people pushing for -Wall and -Werror. In most professional projects I have been in, though, we have to use black boxes (or, currently, non-standard compilers) that prevent correcting many warnings. I wish we had a finer granularity there but well...