Andrei Alexandrescu 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 if the initial state is X, is "done!" printed or not?