On 17/10/2014 10:15, Christian Kandeler wrote: > 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 to comply with (irrespective if some people might find these rules outdated, 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.
That one is always subject to debate. There is one thing not to forget in favor of this rule : enums are *not* guaranted to have a value amongst the defined ones. Undefined behaviour in that case is not an option. I wish i could have both a default statement and my compiler warning… Regards, Julien _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
