On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:52:04PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> for_each_something(foo)
> if (foo->bla)
> call_bla(foo);
> else
> call_default(foo);
>
> Totally contrived, but this complains. Liberally sprinkling {} also shuts
> up the compiler, but it's a bit confusing given that a plain for {;;} is
> totally fine. And it's confusing since at first glance the compiler
> complaining about nested if and ambigous else doesn't make sense since
> clearly there's only 1 if there.
Ah, so the pattern the compiler tries to warn about is:
if (foo)
if (bar)
/* stmts1 */
else
/* stmts2 *
Because it might not be immediately obvious with which if the else goes.
Which is fair enough I suppose.
OK, ACK.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
