This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Implement -Wimplicit-fallthrough (version 9)



On 27/09/16 11:41, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:32:42AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
where the code is:
2156               /* Fall through - if the lane index isn't a constant then
2157                  the next case will error.  */
2158
2159             case NEON_ARG_CONSTANT:


Is there supposed to be no empty line between the case statement and the comment?
Or is the comment only supposed to contain "Fall through"?
The last comment before case or default keyword (or user label before
case/default) has to match one of the following regexps:
//-fallthrough$
//@fallthrough@$
//[ \t]*FALL(S | |-)?THR(OUGH|U)\.?[ \t]*$
//[ \t]*Fall(s | |-)?[Tt]hr(ough|u)\.?[ \t]*$
//[ \t]*fall(s | |-)?thr(ough|u)\.?[ \t]*$
/\*-fallthrough\*/
/\*@fallthrough@\*/
/\*[ \t]*FALL(S | |-)?THR(OUGH|U)\.?[ \t]*\*/
/\*[ \t]*Fall(s | |-)?[Tt]hr(ough|u)\.?[ \t]*\*/
/\*[ \t]*fall(s | |-)?thr(ough|u)\.?[ \t]*\*/

So, you could e.g. write:
	/* If the lane index isn't a constant, then the next case will error.  */
	/* Fall through.  */
but not what you have, free form is not accepted.
Thanks. Given the discussion going on about the acceptable comment formats,
is it preferable to use comments in the gcc codebase at all, or should I
use gcc_fallthrough () (with an explanatory comment if needed)?

Kyrill

	Jakub


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]