Re: [PATCH] linux-record: Squash cases with identical handling

[Andreas Arnez <arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Wed, Apr 13 2016, Yao Qi wrote:

> I thought about squashing them too, but the reason I didn't do that is
> these enum gdb_syscall in the switch block are listed in the numeric
> order, so that it is quite easy to find whether a syscall is supported,
> or add a new syscall.

Ah, interesting point.  If we want to stick to this rule, maybe this
should be stated in a comment above the switch statement?

Or should we aim at getting GDB '-Wswitch'-clean?  (Probably a good idea
anyhow...)  Then we could replace the default label by explicit case
labels for all unsupported syscalls and rely on GCC to catch any further
missing case labels.  Once that's done, the order of case labels
wouldn't matter, IMO.

> but, I don't like the fall-through.

Yeah, it's kind of ugly.  I can certainly drop this change from the
patch if that helps.

--
Andreas