Did anyone suggest "continue case" instead of "continue switch"? That sounds less ambiguous to me.
--bb On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > > [snip] >> >> >> Andrei > > Well, "goto case" and "goto case XXX" both already exist. Both get the job > done. So, regardless of which would be better for fallthrough, we can choose > to use whichever we want in our code. As it stands, it becomes a matter of > preference. I'd love something like "continue switch" or "fallthrough" to > indicate explicit fallthrough, but it isn't at all necessary, so it's not > worth trying to get Walter to add anything like that. > > At this point, if Walter makes it so that case blocks must end with a flow > control statement of some kind, we're free to use either "goto case" or > "goto case XXX" for fallthrough, so unless "goto case" is so bad that we > should try to get Walter to get rid of it, I don't think that it's really an > issue. We can use whichever one we want and not worry about it. The language > is complete enough to require case statements to end with a control > statement without losing any flexibility, so I think that we can agree to > disagree on which statement is better and/or clearer and try and get Walter > to add the compiler error for naked fallthrough. > > - Jonathan M Davis >