Jun 11, 2019 · The picky thing is not always necessary. Constant folding/propagation is quite fundamental for a decent compiler to figure out whether the case label is constant or not …

Oct 3, 2021 · Wrapping the case in an explicit block solves the problem: switch(foo) { case 1: { int i = 42; // i only exists within the { } dostuff(i); break; } case 2: dostuff(123); // Now you cannot …

Apr 1, 2014 · You don't have a C label. It's very odd and butt-ugly, and I'm surprised the C compiler allows it. But it does. I think it is because once inside the switch statement, the C …

Sep 18, 2008 · On the C side that extra {} introduces a compound statement, thus making the case VAL: label to apply to a statement, which eliminates the C issue. In C case the problem …

Feb 4, 2022 · A label for a plain labeled statement can be any identifier. An identifier is a string of characters that is not a keyword of the C language; that starts with _ , a letter a-z, a letter A-Z, …

Apr 29, 2016 · A less frequently occurring issue that has greater impact on complexity is the distinction between “case-labeled statements” and “case labels.” When several case labels …

Apr 8, 2019 · A case label in a switch statement requires an integer constant expression, which is defined as: An integer constant expression shall have integer type and shall only have …

Mar 18, 2015 · In this case, KEY_F(9) is evaluating to something outside the range of char. The switch statement is assuming that because its argument is a char, that all case labels will be …

Apr 21, 2019 · Yes, case2 : is not a case label, but it is a valid valid ordinary label. Any statement may be preceded by such a label. Since you're using GCC, you could consider turning on the …

May 12, 2014 · You should be declaring variables outside the switch statement and not inside a case. In particular sum and diff are problematic in your code. Once these variables are …