AaronBallman wrote:
> I'm not seeing any compile time impact from dropping the `DefaultIgnore`s on
> warn_unannotated_fallthrough/warn_unannotated_fallthrough_per_function. So
> either it's free or I'm still doing something wrong.
> (http://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=6d12b3f67df429bffff6e1953d9f55867d7e2469&to=4117b087cc607686c472f54f82f1222688b5f2bf&stat=instructions:u)
Yeah, that logic should suffice:
```
bool FallThroughDiagFull =
!Diags.isIgnored(diag::warn_unannotated_fallthrough, D->getBeginLoc());
bool FallThroughDiagPerFunction = !Diags.isIgnored(
diag::warn_unannotated_fallthrough_per_function, D->getBeginLoc());
if (FallThroughDiagFull || FallThroughDiagPerFunction ||
fscope->HasFallthroughStmt) {
DiagnoseSwitchLabelsFallthrough(S, AC, !FallThroughDiagFull);
}
```
so unless something explicitly ignores the fallthrough warning in the setup, it
seems like a valid test.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97926
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
