Rainer Deyke wrote:
Georg Wrede wrote:
This is usable, easy to read -- and the programmer has no problem to
remember that .. works differently in case statements than in ranges.
You're making two assumptions here:
1. That inclusive ranges are preferable inside 'case' statements.
Yes. The point of case a: .. case b: is to save you from writing case a:
case a+1: and so on up to case b:. There is no exclusion. You write now
the cases you want to handle.
2. That non-inclusive ranges are preferable outside 'case' statements.
Of course. One word: STL.
I don't buy it. The issue of inclusive versus non-inclusive ranges is
*exactly the same* in and outside 'case' statements.
No.
Andrei
