On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 07:54:19AM +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 18/01/2022 22:42, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > + default:
> > > + break;
> > Please don't do that. You can do
> >
> > default:
> > break;
> > break;
> > /* And just to make sure: */
> > break;
> > break;
> >
> > and it will do exactly the same as not having a default at all. Not
> > having such useless code is by far the most readable, so please don't
> > include a default case at all.
>
> I removed the default case. I hope this is what you wanted.
Unfortunately the removal of default: break; breaks bootstrap:
../../gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc: In function ‘const char*
rs6000_machine_from_flags()’:
../../gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:5940:10: error: enumeration value
‘PROCESSOR_PPC601’ not handled in switch [-Werror=switch]
5940 | switch (rs6000_cpu)
| ^
../../gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:5940:10: error: enumeration value
‘PROCESSOR_PPC603’ not handled in switch [-Werror=switch]
...
default: break; is needed to tell the -Wswitch warning that it is intentional
that not all enumerators are handled in the switch.
I've committed following as obvious to unbreak the bootstrap.
2022-01-19 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
* config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (rs6000_machine_from_flags): Add default:.
--- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc.jj
+++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc
@@ -5958,6 +5958,9 @@ rs6000_machine_from_flags (void)
case PROCESSOR_PPCE6500:
return "e6500";
+
+ default:
+ break;
}
HOST_WIDE_INT flags = rs6000_isa_flags;
Jakub
