[PATCH] Introduce -Wimplicit-fallthrough={0,1,2,3,4,5}
Bernd Schmidt
bschmidt@redhat.com
Wed Oct 12 10:23:00 GMT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH] Introduce -Wimplicit-fallthrough={0,1,2,3,4,5}
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH] Introduce -Wimplicit-fallthrough={0,1,2,3,4,5}
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
On 10/12/2016 12:08 PM, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> Actually looking more closely it appears that all of the 136 additional
> warnings for level 2 are bogus, too. Here is an example:
>
> switch (class) {
> case ATA_DEV_SEMB:
> class = ATA_DEV_ATA; /* some hard drives report SEMB sig */
> case ATA_DEV_ATA:
> case ATA_DEV_ZAC:
> tf.command = ATA_CMD_ID_ATA;
> break;
Another interesting question would be, how many of the level 1 warnings
are false positives? But I'm not going to make you go through all 951 of
them.
Bernd
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH] Introduce -Wimplicit-fallthrough={0,1,2,3,4,5}
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH] Introduce -Wimplicit-fallthrough={0,1,2,3,4,5}
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list