From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add "-Wimplicit-fallthrough" to default flags (was Re: pgsql: Support FETCH FIRST WITH TIES) |
Date: | 2020-05-11 19:46:32 |
Message-ID: | CAOBaU_auOcrUp2G5BkPStk823doZHA4B=7qAu+e7BeK2f7j7ng@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:40 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 3:41 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Why? It uses "fallthrough" which is a legal spelling per level 4.
>
> > GCC documentation mentions [ \t]*FALLTHR(OUGH|U)[ \t]* for level 4
> > (out of the view other alternatives), which AFAICT is case sensitive
> > (level 3 has fall(s | |-)?thr(ough|u)[ \t.!]*(-[^\n\r]*)?).
>
> Oh, I'd missed that that was case sensitive. Ugh --- that seems
> unreasonable. Maybe we'd better settle for level 3 after all;
> I don't think there's much room to doubt the intentions of a
> comment spelled that way.
Agreed.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-05-11 21:08:56 | Re: pgsql: Show opclass and opfamily related information in psql |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-05-11 18:16:11 | pgsql: Doc: fix "Unresolved ID reference" warnings, clean up man page c |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-05-11 20:04:31 | Re: gcov coverage data not full with immediate stop |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2020-05-11 19:43:17 | Re: COPY, lock release and MVCC |