Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Dec 2000 20:57:21 +0100 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: 2.2.18 signal.h |
| |
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 11:18:35AM -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> writes: > > > x() > > { > > > > switch (1) { > > case 0: > > case 1: > > case 2: > > case 3: > > ; > > } > > } > > > > Why am I required to put a `;' only in the last case and not in all > > the previous ones? Or maybe gcc-latest is forgetting to complain about > > the previous ones ;) > > Your C language knowledge seems to have holes. It must be possible to > have more than one label for a statement. Look through the kernel > sources, there are definitely cases where this is needed.
I don't understand what you're talking about. Who ever talked about "more than one label"?
The only issue here is having 1 random label at the end of a compound statement. Nothing else.
And yes I can see that the whole point of the change is that they want to also forbids this:
x() { goto out; out: }
and I dislike not being allowed to do the above as well infact ;).
Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |