tbaeder added a comment.
I know this has been reverted, but for the record, the implementation has a few
shortcomings that makes it hard to use it for projects that rely on fallthrough
comments:
- The comment is not recognized if it is on the same line as the last
statement, e.g.
case 2:
n++; // fallthrough
case 3:
// ...
- The implementation only scans until the next non-empty line and checks it for
a comment, so there can't be a comment between the fallthrough comment and the
last statement, making the following case not work:
case 2:
if (some_bool)
n++;
// otherwise, don't increment n
// fallthrough
case 3:
// ...
- If the last statement ends in a macro, this implementation checks the source
code at the definition of the macro, so this breaks:
#define SOME_MACRO 1
switch(c) {
case 0:
n += SOME_MACRO;
//fallthrough
case 1:
// ...
}
- I'm not 100% why this is the case, but for more complex if statements, the
second branch will start the comment search in the line of the if statement:
case 0:
if (n == 3 && p == 4)
n++;
// fallthrough
case1:
//...
They aren't hard to fix, but I think it would generally make more sense to
search for a fallthrough comment upwards from a case statement instead of
downwards. That way the "pick the first non-empty line matching the regex"
logic should work, too.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D73852/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D73852
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
