On 10/17/2014 08:48 AM, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > As we are developing for aerospace, avionics, defence and healthcare, we are > confronted on a daily basis with a lot of very stringent rules that we have > to comply with (irrespective if some people might find these rules outdated, > stupid, ridiculous or not). That's why we always compile with as much > compiler warnings as possible. Our code must be audited by an external office > anyways, so we better make sure we can avoid a bad report as soon as possible. > Some examples of 'stupid' rules (which after second consideration aren't that > stupid after all): > - a switch statement must always have a default statement (also all cases > must be handled)
Doesn't this actually make the code *worse* when using enums? Adding a default statement when you handle all possible values will inhibit genuine compiler warnings when you forget to add a case for a newly added enum value. In fact, this is almost guaranteed to happen in a non-trivial project, so this rule seems almost absurdly wrong to me. Christian _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
