On Wed, 03 Oct 2018 20:08:31 +0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
On 10/3/18 6:19 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Wed, 03 Oct 2018 18:08:07 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Wed, 03 Oct 2018 12:38:36 +0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
Replace "fallthru" with a proper "fall through" annotation.
This fix is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva gustavo@embeddedor.com
Thanks, applied.
BTW, does "fallthru" really cause a warning? I thought it's also accepted as well as "fall-through". At least, my gcc-8 doesn't give a warning with "fallthru".
You are correct. It does not trigger a warning.
There are about 50 similar instances in the whole codebase. And, as they are just a few, what I'm trying to do is to replace them with the most commonly used form: "fall through"
Hm, then I'm not sure whether it's worth for further similar replacements. A term "fallthru" is also very commonly used, and the compiler knows it, too, so why bother to rewrite?
I don't mean to revert the already applied changes, but maybe better to concentrate on fixing other real bugs (and/or real warnings).
thanks,
Takashi