https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104504
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
At the C/C++ level certainly not, it could be
int foo(int x, int y) {
switch (bar (x, y)) {
int y;
default:
y = x * 2;
return y;
}
}
and the inner y shouldn't be in scope of the switch control expression.
Now, for this particular case, it surely could be handled like:
auto tmp_ = bar (x, y);
{
int y;
switch (tmp_) {
default:
y = x * 2;
return y;
}
}
but I really don't understand why exactly this case should get extra special
care when
switch (x) {
case 4:
++y;
case 5:
int y;
default:
y = x * 2;
return y;
}
can't easily.
