https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107571
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> --- On Tue, 8 Nov 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs wrote: > And looking at the C wording in n2596.pdf, seems it is different again: That's a very old version. N3054 is the most recent public draft (SC22 N5777 is more recent than that and is the actual CD ballot text). > "The next block item(6.8.2) that would be encountered after a fallthrough > declaration shall be a case label or default label associated with the > smallest > enclosing switch statement." It's not exactly clear what "next block item" is for any of the examples you give - next lexically (OK once the current one is exited) or in execution (no good for a Constraint)? And thus not clear that any of these are invalid. I've noted that the inconsistency with C++ should be raised in an NB comment.
