Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 09:41:46PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
>> These warnings were issued by gcc v3.4.4, but not by gcc v4.1.2.
>> So I guess gcc probably found these warnings to be too noisy ...
> [...]
>> --- a/parse.c
>> +++ b/parse.c
>> @@ -2616,6 +2616,8 @@ struct token *external_declaration(struct token *token, struct symbol_list **lis
>> case SYM_ENUM:
>> case SYM_RESTRICT:
>> base_type->ident = ident;
>> + default:
>> + break;
>> }
>
> I don't think you want to add defaults like this just to avoid warnings.
> Warnings like that can help when adding a new item to an enum, to find
> the places where you need to extend the code to hand the new item. And
> since current GCC doesn't even issue the warning by default, it seems
> even more unnecessary to add that default case.
>
OK...
So, if I understand your argument, in order to make the best use of these
warnings, then the correct change would look like the diff given below,
and (for more up-to-date gcc) add -Wswitch-enum to CFLAGS (at least
occasionally).
Yes?
[if no, then I obviously don't understand ;-)]
Hmm, I have another idea; a new patch is brewing!
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
-->8--
diff --git a/parse.c b/parse.c
index e5ad867..afe39c3 100644
--- a/parse.c
+++ b/parse.c
@@ -2616,6 +2616,23 @@ struct token *external_declaration(struct token *token, struct symbol_list **lis
case SYM_ENUM:
case SYM_RESTRICT:
base_type->ident = ident;
+ break;
+ case SYM_UNINITIALIZED:
+ case SYM_PREPROCESSOR:
+ case SYM_BASETYPE:
+ case SYM_NODE:
+ case SYM_PTR:
+ case SYM_FN:
+ case SYM_ARRAY:
+ case SYM_TYPEDEF:
+ case SYM_TYPEOF:
+ case SYM_MEMBER:
+ case SYM_BITFIELD:
+ case SYM_LABEL:
+ case SYM_FOULED:
+ case SYM_KEYWORD:
+ case SYM_BAD:
+ break;
}
}
} else if (base_type && base_type->type == SYM_FN) {
-->8--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
