On 2011-05-31 15:03, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 5/31/11 4:46 PM, KennyTM~ wrote: > > On Jun 1, 11 05:37, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > >> If you didn't have fallback, you would probably have to add some kind > >> of new statement like "goto next" or "fallback" on each of those > >> cases. > > > > It already exists. It is called# > > > > goto case; > > Sigh. Unless it's a recent addition, I didn't know about it, Walter > missed the case during proofreading, and consequently that's not > documented in TDPL.
He probably always uses implicit fallthrough in his own code, and we know that he doesn't use fallthrough in switch statements as much as he thought that he did, so I suppose that it's not a great surprise that he miissed it. It would have been nice to have it in TDPL though. - Jonathan M Davis
