1 /* $NetBSD: msg_338.c,v 1.9 2023/03/28 14:44:35 rillig Exp $ */
2 # 3 "msg_338.c"
3
4 // Test for message: option '%c' should be handled in the switch [338]
5
6 /* lint1-extra-flags: -X 351 */
7
8 int getopt(int, char *const *, const char *);
9 extern char *optarg;
10
11 int
main(int argc,char ** argv)12 main(int argc, char **argv)
13 {
14 int o;
15
16 /* expect+2: warning: option 'c' should be handled in the switch [338] */
17 /* expect+1: warning: option 'd' should be handled in the switch [338] */
18 while ((o = getopt(argc, argv, "a:bc:d")) != -1) {
19 switch (o) {
20 case 'a':
21 break;
22 case 'b':
23 /*
24 * The following while loop must not finish the check
25 * for the getopt options.
26 */
27 while (optarg[0] != '\0')
28 optarg++;
29 break;
30 case 'e':
31 /* expect-1: warning: option 'e' should be listed in the options string [339] */
32 break;
33 case 'f':
34 /* expect-1: warning: option 'f' should be listed in the options string [339] */
35 /*
36 * The case labels in nested switch statements are
37 * ignored by the check for getopt options.
38 */
39 switch (optarg[0]) {
40 case 'X':
41 break;
42 }
43 break;
44 case '?':
45 default:
46 break;
47 }
48 }
49
50 /* A while loop that is not related to getopt is simply skipped. */
51 while (o != 0) {
52 switch (o) {
53 case '?':
54 o = ':';
55 }
56 }
57
58 return 0;
59 }
60
61 void usage(void);
62
63 /*
64 * Before ckgetopt.c 1.11 from 2021-08-23, lint wrongly warned about a
65 * missing '?' in the switch statement, even though it was there.
66 *
67 * Seen in usr.bin/ftp/main.c 1.127 from 2020-07-18.
68 */
69 int
question_option(int argc,char ** argv)70 question_option(int argc, char **argv)
71 {
72 int c;
73
74 while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "?x")) != -1) {
75 switch (c) {
76 case 'x':
77 break;
78 case '?':
79 usage();
80 return 0;
81 default:
82 usage();
83 return 1;
84 }
85 }
86 return 0;
87 }
88
89 /*
90 * If the first character of the options string is ':', getopt does not print
91 * its own error messages. Getopt returns ':' if an option is missing its
92 * argument; that is handled by the 'default:' already.
93 */
94 int
suppress_errors(int argc,char ** argv)95 suppress_errors(int argc, char **argv)
96 {
97 int c;
98
99 /* expect+1: warning: option 'o' should be handled in the switch [338] */
100 while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, ":b:o")) != -1) {
101 switch (c) {
102 case 'b':
103 return 'b';
104 default:
105 usage();
106 }
107 }
108 return 0;
109 }
110
111 /*
112 * If the first character of the options string is ':', getopt returns ':'
113 * if an option is missing its argument. This condition can be handled
114 * separately from '?', which getopt returns for unknown options.
115 */
116 int
missing_argument(int argc,char ** argv)117 missing_argument(int argc, char **argv)
118 {
119 int c;
120
121 /* expect+1: warning: option 'o' should be handled in the switch [338] */
122 while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, ":b:o")) != -1) {
123 switch (c) {
124 case 'b':
125 return 'b';
126 case ':':
127 return 'm';
128 default:
129 usage();
130 }
131 }
132 return 0;
133 }
134
135 /*
136 * Getopt only returns ':' if ':' is the first character in the options
137 * string. Everywhere else, a ':' marks the preceding option as having a
138 * required argument. In theory, if the options string contained "a::x",
139 * that could be interpreted as '-a argument', followed by '-:' and '-x',
140 * but nobody does that.
141 */
142 int
unreachable_colon(int argc,char ** argv)143 unreachable_colon(int argc, char **argv)
144 {
145 int c;
146
147 /* expect+1: warning: option 'b' should be handled in the switch [338] */
148 while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "b:")) != -1) {
149 switch (c) {
150 /* expect+1: warning: option ':' should be listed in the options string [339] */
151 case ':':
152 return 'm';
153 default:
154 usage();
155 }
156 }
157 return 0;
158 }
159