Re: [PATCH 1/2] Compiler Attributes: add support for __fallthrough (gcc >= 7.1)

[Nick Desaulniers]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 11:15 AM Bernd Petrovitsch
<bernd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi all!
>
> On 22/10/18 19:54, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 10:50 AM Bernd Petrovitsch
> > <bernd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> [...]
> >> PS: clang++ errors with "fallthrough annotation in unreachable code" if
> >>     [[fallthrough]] is after an assert(). clang-devs there, please, the
> >>     fallthrough doesn't really generated code (I hope;-).
> [...]
> > Can you send me a link to a simple reproducer in godbolt (godbolt.org)
> > and we'll take a look?
>
> Does https://godbolt.org/z/2Y4zIo do it - I'm a godbolt-newbie?

Moving the kernel folks to bcc, since we don't need to be discussing
C++ on LKML.
https://godbolt.org/z/B1fo9Z shows that this works as intended, for
cases that cannot be statically proven.  I guess I'm looking for a
more realistic code sample to show why putting a `break;` statement
there is untenable?

>
> For
> ----  snip  ----
> #include <cassert>
>
> int main(void)
> {
>   switch (1) {
>   default:
>     assert(0);
>     [[fallthrough]];
>   case 1:
>     ;
>   }
>   return 0;
> }
> ----  snip  ----
> Just "clang++ -Wimplicit-fallthrough -Werror" it .....
>
> MfG,
>         Bernd
> --
> "I dislike type abstraction if it has no real reason. And saving
> on typing is not a good reason - if your typing speed is the main
> issue when you're coding, you're doing something seriously wrong."
>     - Linus Torvalds



-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers