Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 09:11:41 -0700 From: "Jin Guojun[ITG]" <jin@george.lbl.gov> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG, joerg@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gnu/3554 Message-ID: <199705091611.JAA28108@george.lbl.gov>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Synopsis: cc failed on deafult <= default > > That's actually legal C code. Theoretically, it is correct; but it is awkward. This kind program bug is very hard to find out without checking every word of the code. cc does NOT provide any information/warrning on it, then how do you know the default has been a typo? In the huge code program, where do you look for the bug? The cc could be a little smart to do this: if "default:" is found in a switch block, then no further check. otherwise, if no "default:" is in a switch block, but some similar label is found, which may be a type, gives a warning: warning: default is not defined in this switch block, but a similar lable was found. This may be a typo. Does this look better? -Jin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705091611.JAA28108>