------- Comment #9 from alex dot pyattaev at gmail dot com 2010-05-09 19:07
-------
(In reply to comment #7)
> I have encountered the bug with switch construct. And the problem is not the
> error message, but the fact that it is still compiling just fine this code:
> switch (chan_prop.model_type)
> {
> case CM_STATIC:
> return static_channel_model(src, ntransmitters, dst,
> &chan_prop);
> case CM_FRISS:
> return friss_channel_model(src, ntransmitters, dst,
> &chan_prop);
> default:
> return -1;
> }
> There should be some consistency at least! I'd like to see this fixed
> properly.
> The compiler should be perfectly predictable, and not like "Sorry, i don't
> like
> this construct here... put a semicolon please".
>
> I'd like this bug to be reopened and FIXED PROPERLY
>
> gcc --version = (Gentoo 4.4.3-r2 p1.2) 4.4.3
>
A good example of seemingly normal code is following:
switch (whatever)
{
case 1:
int i=0;
i++;
printf("%d",i);
break;
}
It is technically perfectly legal to declare i as a local variable. However,
the compiler issues an error. And it is absolutely not clear why "int i=0;" is
not a statement. That is probably the only really annoying case. Moving
declaration of i into a code block solves the issue. I spent like 10 minutes
trying to find out why perfectly legal code would not compile.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37231
