RFC redundant assignment in switch

Speaking as someone who has tried to use the static analyser on a
largish code base in the recent past, I would *much* rather see a
separate checker. We have literally hundreds of false positives from
dead stores and actively ignore them. A "dead store due to fall-through
case" on the other hand is likely a bug and is thus very interesting.

To be clear, I'm most commenting on reporting *interface* not
*implementation*.

thanks!

yes I think *interface* and *implementation* is different things. I have no objection about implementing this in the dead stores checker. and I'd be happy to separate the interface.

..................................................................................................................
Daniel Marjamäki Senior Engineer
Evidente ES East AB Warfvinges väg 34 SE-112 51 Stockholm Sweden

Mobile: +46 (0)709 12 42 62
E-mail: Daniel.Marjamaki@evidente.se

www.evidente.se