On December 1, 2017 12:16:55 AM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek
wrote:
>Hi!
>
>A nested switch that can fallthrough (either because it has break stmts
>or because it doesn't have default: and doesn't cover all cases) isn't
>unfortunately reported with -Wimplicit-fallthrough, because we first
>gimplify t
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> c/
> * c-parser.c: Include tree-iterator.h.
> (c_parser_switch_statement): Emit LABEL_EXPR for the break label
> into SWITCH_BODY instead of after it and set SWITCH_BREAK_LABEL_P
> on it.
The C front-end changes are OK.
--
Josep
Hi!
A nested switch that can fallthrough (either because it has break stmts
or because it doesn't have default: and doesn't cover all cases) isn't
unfortunately reported with -Wimplicit-fallthrough, because we first
gimplify the nested switch and then we just see a label added implicitly
for break
