62 lines · c
1// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=c,both -Wjump-misses-init %s2// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=c,both -Wc++-compat %s3// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=good %s4// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=good -fms-compatibility %s5// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify=cxx,both -x c++ %s6// good-no-diagnostics7 8void goto_func_1(void) {9 goto ouch; // c-warning {{jump from this goto statement to its label is incompatible with C++}} \10 cxx-error {{cannot jump from this goto statement to its label}}11 int i = 12; // both-note {{jump bypasses variable initialization}}12 13ouch:14 ;15}16 17void goto_func_2(void) {18 goto ouch;19 static int i = 12; // This initialization is not jumped over, so no warning.20 21ouch:22 ;23}24 25void switch_func(int i) {26 switch (i) {27 int x = 12; // both-note {{jump bypasses variable initialization}}28 case 0: // c-warning {{jump from switch statement to this case label is incompatible with C++}} \29 cxx-error {{cannot jump from switch statement to this case label}}30 break;31 }32}33 34// Statement expressions are a bit strange in that they seem to allow for35// jumping past initialization without being diagnosed, even in C++. Perhaps36// this should change?37void f(void) {38 ({39 goto ouch;40 int i = 12;41 });42 43 for (int i = ({ goto ouch; int x = 10; x;}); i < 0; ++i) {44 }45 46ouch:47 ;48}49 50void indirect(int n) {51DirectJump:52 ;53 54 void *Table[] = {&&DirectJump, &&Later};55 goto *Table[n]; // c-warning {{jump from this indirect goto statement to one of its possible targets is incompatible with C++}} \56 cxx-error {{cannot jump from this indirect goto statement to one of its possible targets}}57 58 int x = 12; // both-note {{jump bypasses variable initialization}}59Later: // both-note {{possible target of indirect goto statement}}60 ;61}62