On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 5:25 PM Mark Dilger
<mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 12, 2020, at 7:55 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >
> > Poking around in the archives, it seems like the only previous formal
> > proposal to add -Wimplicit-fallthrough was in the context of a much
> > more aggressive proposal to make a lot of non-Wall warnings into
> > errors [1], which people did not like.
>
> That was from me.
>
> > The only more-restrictive alternative, short of disabling
> > the comments altogether, is
> >
> > * -Wimplicit-fallthrough=4 case sensitively matches one of the
> > following regular expressions:
> >
> > *<"-fallthrough">
> > *<"@fallthrough@">
> > *<"lint -fallthrough[ \t]*">
> > *<"[ \t]*FALLTHR(OUGH|U)[ \t]*">
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Naturally, I'm +1 for this.
+1 too, obviously.
