Hi cfe-commits,

This patch handles a specific (but surprisingly common) case when a
fall-through occurs to a switch label immediately followed by a break;. In
this case it doesn't make sense to suggest a fall-through annotation,
almost certainly inserting break; is a good fix-it.
Example:

switch (x) {
  case 111:
    f();
  case 222: // don't offer "[[clang::fallthrough]];", just "break;"
    break;
}

Please, review this patch.

--
Best regards,
Alexander Kornienko

Attachment: fallthrough-to-empty-case.diff
Description: Binary data

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to