[llvm-dev] Excessive use of LLVM_FALLTHROUGH?

[Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev]

Aha!  Trying out –Wimplicit-fallthrough, you don't need an annotation for successive cases with no code in between.
So all of these really are just noise.
Thanks,
--paulr

From: Reid Kleckner [mailto:rnk at google.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 3:04 PM
To: Robinson, Paul
Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Excessive use of LLVM_FALLTHROUGH?

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
So, can I take out all the ones marked "not needed" as an NFC cleanup?

Yep, go for it! It doesn't look like we build with -Wimplicit-fallthrough, so all these annotations are really just for readability and future proofing for when someone enables it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170301/e175be56/attachment-0001.html>