1) Having a comma at the end of a list also makes no sense. But it simplifies additions of additional entries/lines, automatic code generation, copy&paste, etc. a return statement could be created even for noreturn functions by macros, e.g. some macros create log messages for entering or leaving functions. 2) The return type is not part of the function signature for overloading, but it is part of the function type. Functions with different return types are not ABI compatible either. So a noreturn function could have a return type, but no return instruction? -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von:Matthias Wippich via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> I think the change you propose is interesting, but if pursued for C++ I would welcome discussion about situations like the aforementioned - especially since you claim that having a return statement in a [[noreturn]] function makes "absolutely no sense".