On 06/21/2010 03:46 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
On 06/21/2010 01:27 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
Jonathan M Davis Wrote:
In any case, that means that it could be made required to have a
control
statement at the end of a case block without having to specify a
specific
destination for fallthrough - though I'd prefer "continue switch"
over "goto
case" since it's more explicit and less error prone (since there's
no doubt
that you didn't intend to put a destination for the goto if you use
"continue switch" instead of a "goto case" without a destination).
It's a small thing, but I think "continue switch" could be
misleading. Consider this:
switch (getState()) {
case X:
setState(Z);
continue switch;
case Y:
break;
case Z:
writeln( "done!" );
}
Having never encountered D before, what would be your interpretation
of this code?
Well looks pretty good to me to be honest.
So would you say "done!" is printed or not?
I say it isn't because the switch predicate is only evaluated once and
if you change it after evaluation it doesn't matter.
*Placing bet of 5 pixels*
Oh, wait, does 'continue switch' go back up to the top like what
continue does in a loop?
*quietly withdraws bet*
