Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 01 Aug 2019 13:09:24 -0700 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] compiler_attributes.h: Add 'fallthrough' pseudo keyword for switch/case use | From | hpa@zytor ... |
| |
On August 1, 2019 5:24:29 AM PDT, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 11:10:36PM -0700, hpa@zytor.com wrote: >> On July 31, 2019 4:55:47 PM PDT, Miguel Ojeda ><miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com> wrote: >> >On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 11:01 PM <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> The standard is moving toward adding this as an attribute with the >> >[[fallthrough]] syntax; it is in C++17, not sure when it will be in >C >> >be if it isn't already. >> > >> >Not yet, but it seems to be coming: >> > >> > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2268.pdf >> > >> >However, even if C2x gets it, it will be quite a while until the GCC >> >minimum version gets bumped up to that, so... >> > >> >Cheers, >> >Miguel >> >> The point was that we should plan ahead in whatever we end up doing. > >By reserving 'fallthrough' as a keyword we do exactly that. We can then >define it to whatever the compiler/tool at hand requires. > >Once GCC gains support for that [[attribute]] nonsense, we can detector >that and use that over the __attribute__(()) > >[ Also the Cxx attribute syntax is an abomination -- just a lesser one >than reading actual comments :-) ]
I'm not disagreeing... I think using a macro makes sense.
Not sure if I agree about the syntax... I think it's rather friendly compared to gcc's ;) -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
| |