On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 03:42:12PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> --- gcc/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> +++ gcc/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> @@ -11590,6 +11590,7 @@ resolve_overloaded_builtin (location_t loc, tree
> function,
> gcc_unreachable ();
> }
> /* Fallthrough to the normal processing. */
> + gcc_fallthrough ();
> }
> case BUILT_IN_ATOMIC_EXCHANGE_N:
> case BUILT_IN_ATOMIC_COMPARE_EXCHANGE_N:
> @@ -11598,6 +11599,7 @@ resolve_overloaded_builtin (location_t loc, tree
> function,
> {
> fetch_op = false;
> /* Fallthrough to further processing. */
> + gcc_fallthrough ();
> }
> case BUILT_IN_ATOMIC_ADD_FETCH_N:
> case BUILT_IN_ATOMIC_SUB_FETCH_N:
> @@ -11614,6 +11616,7 @@ resolve_overloaded_builtin (location_t loc, tree
> function,
> {
> orig_format = false;
> /* Fallthru for parameter processing. */
> + gcc_fallthrough ();
> }
These 3 look just like misformatted stuff, {}s around for no reason
whatsoever, the first case even badly indented and the latter two with a
single stmt inside of {}.
I think it would be better to just remove the useless outer {} pair
in all the cases, reindent and replace the comments with /* FALLTHRU */
> diff --git gcc/gcc/c/c-typeck.c gcc/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> index 5194027..e89bdc8 100644
> --- gcc/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> +++ gcc/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
> @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ composite_type (tree t1, tree t2)
>
> t1 = build_function_type (valtype, newargs);
> t1 = qualify_type (t1, t2);
> - /* ... falls through ... */
> + gcc_fallthrough ();
> }
One option for here (other than removing the {}s, which would require
separate var declarations from their assignments) would be to just do:
- /* ... falls through ... */
}
+ /* FALLTHRU */
> diff --git gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
> index 2f15a05..c25314e 100644
> --- gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
> +++ gcc/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
> @@ -5489,7 +5489,7 @@ rs6000_builtin_vectorized_libmass (combined_fn fn, tree
> type_out,
> CASE_CFN_HYPOT:
> CASE_CFN_POW:
> n_args = 2;
> - /* fall through */
> + gcc_fallthrough ();
>
> CASE_CFN_ACOS:
> CASE_CFN_ACOSH:
This is needed becase CSE_CFN_ACOS is a macro, right? I guess it is fine.
> --- gcc/gcc/cp/error.c
> +++ gcc/gcc/cp/error.c
> @@ -576,6 +576,7 @@ dump_type (cxx_pretty_printer *pp, tree t, int flags)
> default:
> pp_unsupported_tree (pp, t);
> /* Fall through to error. */
> + gcc_fallthrough ();
>
> case ERROR_MARK:
> pp_string (pp, M_("<type error>"));
> @@ -1277,6 +1278,7 @@ dump_decl (cxx_pretty_printer *pp, tree t, int flags)
> default:
> pp_unsupported_tree (pp, t);
> /* Fall through to error. */
> + gcc_fallthrough ();
>
> case ERROR_MARK:
> pp_string (pp, M_("<declaration error>"));
> @@ -2778,6 +2780,7 @@ dump_expr (cxx_pretty_printer *pp, tree t, int flags)
> default:
> pp_unsupported_tree (pp, t);
> /* fall through to ERROR_MARK... */
> + gcc_fallthrough ();
Why the above ones? Replacing the comments with /* FALLTHRU */ would be
sufficient IMHO. Or is there any value in explaining why it falls through?
Jakub
