Re: [evolution-patches] Build fix for gcc3.4

[Not Zed <notzed ximian com>]

Why is that an error now btw?  A  C99 thing?

I remember seeing these warnings and wondered what shit the C language designers were on.  All it does is force a redundant break statement.  Maybe its some mis-guided attempt to make people handle all cases of an enum explictly or some dopey shit like that?

On Thu, 2004-04-22 at 17:14 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> I had to apply the attached patch to get Evo HEAD to build with gcc3.4
>
> gcc complains about trailing "default:" labels without statements in
> switch statements; I believe this was a warning in gcc3.3 but is now an
> error in gcc3.4  (the message you get is "error: label at end of
> compound statement").
>
> Removing the default statement altogether causes a flood of warnings
> about all the unhandled values; adding a simple "break" after the
> default seems to keep the various versions of gcc happy, YMMV
>
> Dave Malcolm

Michael Zucchi <notzed ximian com> Ximian Evolution and Free Software Developer

Novell, Inc.