On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:39:41PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2016.09.27 at 10:46 +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > > The intent has been that we catch the most common forms, but still require
> > > it not to be complete free form. Because, as experience shows, people are
> > > extremely creative in these comments, and it is not very good idea to
> > > support everything. For ... fall through ... , what is the purpose of
> > > those ...s?
> >
> > No idea, but it has been there for a while and seems perfectly reasonable.
> > IMO any sentence containing "fall" and "through/thru/etc" on the same line
> > should be accepted, otherwise it's just misplaced pickiness.
>
> +1. Folks will just disable the warning if gcc is not very permissive
> when paring existing comments. You cannot expect anyone to change
> perfectly fine fall-through comments just to accommodate an arbitrary
> gcc style.
The accepted style is already very permissive, we don't allow just one
spelling as various lint tools. I'm afraid looking for various cases of
fall and through/thru possibly separated by anything and surrounded by
anything is IMHO already too much, the compiler shouldn't try to try to
grammar analyze the comments on what they actually talk about and whether it
might be related to the switch fall through or something completely
different. Users should start using [[fallthrough]]; anyway.
Jakub
