On ke, 2016-10-19 at 17:35 +0100, Robert Bragg wrote: > I'll add a default: with MISSING_CASE as that looks like an i915- > specific convention; though it seems like a real shame to defer > missing case issues to runtime errors instead of taking advantage of > the compiler complaining at build time that a case has been > forgotten. I think the key point here is not "having MISSING_CASE", but "not having BUG". There has been talk about using compile time checking more effectively, so adding default is not needed. You can keep similar code construct but reduce into WARN_ONCE or so. Regards, Joonas -- Joonas Lahtinen Open Source Technology Center Intel Corporation _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
