C++ Force compile-time error/warning on implicit fall-through in switch

Question

switch statements can be super useful, but lead to a common bug where a programmer forgot a break statement:

switch(val) {
    case 0:
        f         


        

Answer 1

I always write a break; before each case, as follows:

switch(val) {
    break; case 0:
        foo();
    break; case 1:
        bar();
    break; case 2:
        baz();
    break; default:
        roomba();
}

This way, it is much more obvious to the eye if a break; is missing. The initial break; is redundant I suppose, but it helps to be consistent.

This is a conventional switch statement, I've simply used whitespace in a different way, removing the newline that is normally after a break; and before the next case.