Re: [RFC PATCH 00/78] Strict disable implicit fallthrough

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 10:47:04AM +0300, Emmanouil Pitsidianakis wrote:
> 
> Main questions this RFC poses
> =============================
> 
> - Is this change desirable and net-positive.

Yes, IMHO it is worth standardizing on use of the attribute. The allowed
use of comments was a nice thing by the compiler for coping with pre-existing
code, but using the attribute is best long term for a consistent style.

> - Should the `fallthrough;` pseudo-keyword be defined like in the Linux
>   kernel, or use glib's G_GNUC_FALLTHROUGH, or keep the already existing
>   QEMU_FALLTHROUGH macro.

As a general rule, if glib provides functionality we aim o use that
and not reinvent the wheel. IOW, we should just use G_GNUC_FALLTHROUGH.

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|