Re: jscript: Mark some fall-throughs in switch statements

2011-10-08 Thread Andrew Talbot
> Isn't it that way just to save the use of an extra return S_OK? > Instead a break could be used too because that function returns S_OK > by default. > > http://source.winehq.org/source/dlls/jscript/regexp.c#L4025 > > Best regards, > Bruno A fall-through would indeed be lazy and not in the spir

Re: jscript: Mark some fall-throughs in switch statements

2011-10-08 Thread Bruno Jesus
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 14:58, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Andrew Talbot writes: > >> @@ -4037,6 +4037,7 @@ static HRESULT RegExpConstr_leftContext(script_ctx_t >> *ctx, vdisp_t *jsthis, WORD >> >>          V_VT(retv) = VT_BSTR; >>          V_BSTR(retv) = ret; >> +        /* fall through */ >>  

Re: jscript: Mark some fall-throughs in switch statements

2011-10-08 Thread Alexandre Julliard
Andrew Talbot writes: > @@ -4037,6 +4037,7 @@ static HRESULT RegExpConstr_leftContext(script_ctx_t > *ctx, vdisp_t *jsthis, WORD > > V_VT(retv) = VT_BSTR; > V_BSTR(retv) = ret; > +/* fall through */ > } > case DISPATCH_PROPERTYPUT: > return S_OK; I