From 1630f5b92a3a00aff5674f31af1d418628a00ac7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tom Lane Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 23:52:34 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Add comment about intentional fallthrough in switch. Coverity complained about an apparent missing "break" in a switch added by bb140506df605fab. The human-readable comments are pretty clear that this is intentional, but add a standard /* FALL THRU */ comment to make it clear to tools too. --- src/backend/utils/adt/tsginidx.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/tsginidx.c b/src/backend/utils/adt/tsginidx.c index fc0686ee66..3f1e7f961f 100644 --- a/src/backend/utils/adt/tsginidx.c +++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/tsginidx.c @@ -240,6 +240,7 @@ TS_execute_ternary(GinChkVal *gcv, QueryItem *curitem) * treat OP_PHRASE as OP_AND with recheck requirement */ *gcv->need_recheck = true; + /* FALL THRU */ case OP_AND: val1 = TS_execute_ternary(gcv, curitem + curitem->qoperator.left); -- 2.40.0