qq: why not use __attribute__ ((fallthrough)); [1] to get rid of the warnings? This is slightly ugly - so we could hide it in a macro:
#define FALLTHROUGH_INTENDED __attribute__ ((fallthrough))
This would make it explicit that we did intend for this to fall through. It should also be compatible across all compilers.
[1] https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2017/03/10/wimplicit-fallthrough-in-gcc-7/
« Back to merge proposal
qq: why not use __attribute__ ((fallthrough)); [1] to get rid of the warnings? This is slightly ugly - so we could hide it in a macro:
#define FALLTHROUGH_ INTENDED __attribute__ ((fallthrough))
This would make it explicit that we did intend for this to fall through. It should also be compatible across all compilers.
[1] https:/ /developers. redhat. com/blog/ 2017/03/ 10/wimplicit- fallthrough- in-gcc- 7/