On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 11:18:35AM -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> writes:
>
> > x()
> > {
> >
> > switch (1) {
> > case 0:
> > case 1:
> > case 2:
> > case 3:
> > ;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > Why am I required to put a `;' only in the last case and not in all
> > the previous ones? Or maybe gcc-latest is forgetting to complain about
> > the previous ones ;)
>
> Your C language knowledge seems to have holes. It must be possible to
> have more than one label for a statement. Look through the kernel
> sources, there are definitely cases where this is needed.
I don't understand what you're talking about. Who ever talked about "more than
one label"?
The only issue here is having 1 random label at the end of a compound
statement. Nothing else.
And yes I can see that the whole point of the change is that they want
to also forbids this:
x()
{
goto out;
out:
}
and I dislike not being allowed to do the above as well infact ;).
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 15 2000 - 21:00:33 EST