Am 25.02.2012 17:09, schrieb Stefan Weil: > Am 25.02.2012 16:57, schrieb Andreas Färber: >> Am 25.02.2012 14:57, schrieb Stefan Weil: >>> This was not a bug, but it is not common practice to omit the break >>> statement >>> from the last case statement before an empty default case. >>> >>> Any change of the default case would introduce a bug. >>> >>> This was reported as a warning by splint. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil <s...@weilnetz.de> >>> --- >>> ui/vnc-enc-hextile-template.h | 1 + >>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/ui/vnc-enc-hextile-template.h >>> b/ui/vnc-enc-hextile-template.h >>> index b9f9f5e..a7310e1 100644 >>> --- a/ui/vnc-enc-hextile-template.h >>> +++ b/ui/vnc-enc-hextile-template.h >>> @@ -175,6 +175,7 @@ static void CONCAT(send_hextile_tile_, >>> NAME)(VncState *vs, >>> /* we really don't have to invalidate either the bg or fg >>> but we've lost the old values. oh well. */ >>> } >>> + break; >>> default: >> >> Doesn't that require a fallthrough comment for other tools then? >> >> Andreas > > It was a fall through (so a comment would have satisfied static code > analyzers), but with the added 'break' it no longer is. > > As I tried to explain in the commit message, a fall through would > not be reasonable in this special case.
Ah sorry, my comment was based on reading "omit break before default" in the commit message; tired, should've looked more closely. FWIW: Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg