On Wed, 20 May 2026 at 19:26, Richard Henderson
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 5/20/26 11:21, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >>> +                break;
> >>> +            }
> >>> +            g_assert_not_reached();
> >
> > ...ah, I misread it. I think it would be clearer to
> > have the float_expmax_normal case be "g_assert_not_reached()"
> > rather than "break, and rely on the thing immediately next
> > after the switch to be g_assert_not_reached()", because
> > it more obviously says "this case can't occur".
>
> Mm.  I wrote the switch to let -Wall diagnose a missing enumerator, rather 
> than
>
>      case float_expmax_normal:
>      default:
>          g_assert_not_reached();

Since this is the last unreviewed patch in this series,
you can have my

Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <[email protected]>

thanks
-- PMM

Reply via email to