Re: Explicit fall-through in switch statements?

[Andrew Talbot]

Frédéric Delanoy wrote:
> For every wine version, static checkers (like coverity) detect cases
> where a switch case automatically falls-through to the next case.
>
> Shouldn't be there a rule that such cases are always marked with a
> "fall-through comment"?
> With the possible exception of case with no statement? like 'case FOO:
> case BAR: do_something();...'?
>
> This would probably help IMHO, especially when people refactor old code.
>
> Frédéric

I reckon there are currently about 105 unmarked fall-throughs in the dlls.

Unless people consider it offensive, one option might be to make careful use
of git blame to find out who wrote the particular cases and ask them whether
their fall-throughs were deliberate, marking up or fixing with breakS as
appropriate.