KennyTM~: > That is just C#'s switch syntax. Some of the C# designers are people with a long experience in implementing (Pascal-like) programming languages. Convergent evolution is a way to confirm my idea was good, then :-)
>And I don't see how the current switch syntax is "hairy".< Even if you aren't able to see it, it doesn't change the fact that D switch syntax is made by several enhancements (or even fixes, like the one currently discussed, and time ago in bugzilla I have asked for another fix to the switch syntax) over the C switch syntax that is quite unclean and unsafe to start with (see Duff's device for an example of how unclean it is, or the recently introduced "static switch" of D that patches a common bug source). After about three years of using D I am able to forget that "goto case;" is a valid syntax. In another answer Jonathan M Davis says something similar: >I forgot about that one. *Sigh* D has so many cool little features that >sometimes it feels like I'm forgetting at least half of them. Oh well. It's >silly to complain that D has too much cool stuff.< When normal people forget or ignore parts of a basic language construct it means the language is very complex. The recently introduced ranged case syntax can be handy, but it's not a clean thing. So D switches are quite hairy. Somewhere we'll have to write a short list of the differences between D and C switches. Bye, bearophile
