On 06/13/2017 02:51 PM, Karel Zak wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 01:16:57AM +0200, Rüdiger Meier wrote:
BTW just for cosmetics. Maybe we should rename UL_FALLTHROUGH to
__ul_fallthrough
like we have already __ul_calloc_size. IMO it would look more obvious to the
reader.
I don't have strong opinion about that, changed to one you proposed.
Thanks, let's see whether Karel likes this attribute at all ;)
Hmm...
I don't like "meta-programming" where language keywords are
replaced by local macros, for example we have fallback (in c.h) for all
__attribute__ rather than define local macro for all attributes.
__attribute__((fallthrough))
should be fine on non-__GNUC__ as in this case __attribute__ is empty
macro (see c.h).
Yes, __ul_fallthrough seems better, and __attribute__((fallthrough))
would be the best :-)
It's strange if clang will use a different syntax for the same
things. IMHO it would be better to ignore clang for this attribute.
Yes, Sami's last version just ignores clang. Seems that the different syntax
was for C++ only.
So branch 2017wk23 from git@xxxxxxxxxx:kerolasa/lelux-utiliteetit.git is the
last version for merging.
And I'm not sure if the change is compatible with coverity-scan where
comment line /* fallthrough */ is required, but this not so important
(coverity is maintained, so attribute will be supported one day...).
Karel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
