On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 02:23:59PM -0400, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > Tiny patch; some older or newer compilers (I forgot which) will > complain if there is no compound statment after a label.
Thank you! I am surprised it compiled before as a statement is supposed to follow a label - even a single ; will do. > 2024-05-29 Alfred M. Szmidt <a...@gnu.org> > > * tp/Texinfo/XS/main/utils.c (clear_option, free_option) > (initialize_option): Add a no-op compund statment to mitigate > errors from GCC. > > > > diff --git a/tp/Texinfo/XS/main/utils.c b/tp/Texinfo/XS/main/utils.c > index 6d209b699c..b90549afab 100644 > --- a/tp/Texinfo/XS/main/utils.c > +++ b/tp/Texinfo/XS/main/utils.c > @@ -1610,6 +1610,7 @@ clear_option (OPTION *option) > option->integer = -1; > > default: > + break; > } > } > > @@ -1641,6 +1642,7 @@ free_option (OPTION *option) > > case GOT_integer: > default: > + break; > } > } > > @@ -1676,6 +1678,7 @@ initialize_option (OPTION *option, enum > global_option_type type) > break; > > default: > + break; > } > } > >
