On 06.12.2023 04:02, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > --- a/docs/misra/rules.rst > +++ b/docs/misra/rules.rst > @@ -462,11 +462,23 @@ maintainers if you want to suggest a change. > > while(0) and while(1) and alike are allowed. > > + * - `Rule 16.3 > <https://gitlab.com/MISRA/MISRA-C/MISRA-C-2012/Example-Suite/-/blob/master/R_16_03.c>`_ > + - Required > + - An unconditional break statement shall terminate every > + switch-clause > + - In addition to break, also other flow control statements such as > + continue, return, goto are allowed. > + > * - `Rule 16.7 > <https://gitlab.com/MISRA/MISRA-C/MISRA-C-2012/Example-Suite/-/blob/master/R_16_07.c>`_ > - Required > - A switch-expression shall not have essentially Boolean type > - > > + * - `Rule 17.1 > <https://gitlab.com/MISRA/MISRA-C/MISRA-C-2012/Example-Suite/-/blob/master/R_17_01.c>`_ > + - Required > + - The features of <stdarg.h> shall not be used > + -
Did we really accept this without any constraint (warranting mentioning here)? > @@ -478,12 +490,24 @@ maintainers if you want to suggest a change. > have an explicit return statement with an expression > - > > + * - `Rule 17.5 > <https://gitlab.com/MISRA/MISRA-C/MISRA-C-2012/Example-Suite/-/blob/master/R_17_05.c>`_ > + - Advisory > + - The function argument corresponding to a parameter declared to > + have an array type shall have an appropriate number of elements > + - > + > * - `Rule 17.6 > <https://gitlab.com/MISRA/MISRA-C/MISRA-C-2012/Example-Suite/-/blob/master/R_17_06.c>`_ > - Mandatory > - The declaration of an array parameter shall not contain the > static keyword between the [ ] > - > > + * - `Rule 17.7 > <https://gitlab.com/MISRA/MISRA-C/MISRA-C-2012/Example-Suite/-/blob/master/R_17_07.c>`_ > + - Required > + - The value returned by a function having non-void return type > + shall be used > + - Same question here. If the other additions were separate, I probably would have ack-ed them right away. Jan
