thakis marked an inline comment as done.
thakis added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/CFG.cpp:2407
+ return hasSpecificAttr<FallThroughAttr>(A->getAttrs()) &&
+ isa<NullStmt>(A->getSubStmt());
+}
----------------
hans wrote:
> Can fallthrough statements ever have children? If not, should it be an assert
> instead of a check here?
Good question. Attr.td says:
```
// The attribute only applies to a NullStmt, but we have special fix-it
// behavior if applied to a case label.
let Subjects = SubjectList<[NullStmt, SwitchCase], ErrorDiag,
"empty statements">;
```
Which I suppose triggers for this:
```
switch (argc) {
[[fallthrough]] case 4:
break;
}
```
```
foo.cc:6:7: error: 'fallthrough' attribute is only allowed on empty statements
[[fallthrough]] case 4:
^ ~~~~
foo.cc:6:20: note: did you forget ';'?
[[fallthrough]] case 4:
```
But that doesn't seem to make it into the AST, according to -dump-ast. So I
suppose it could be an assert as well. Want me to change this?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111568/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111568
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
