> De: "Kevin Bourrillion" <kev...@google.com> > À: "amber-spec-experts" <amber-spec-experts@openjdk.java.net> > Envoyé: Mercredi 14 Mars 2018 16:55:24 > Objet: Re: expression switch vs. procedural switch
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:02 PM, Kevin Bourrillion < [ > mailto:kev...@google.com > | kev...@google.com ] > wrote: >> The more I have thought about it, the more I believe that 95% of the entire >> value of expression switch is that it isn't procedural switch , and is easier >> to reason about than procedural switch because of all things it can't do: >> * can't miss cases >> * can't return >> * can't break/continue a containing construct >> * can't fall through >> * (for constants or other disjoint patterns) can't depend on the order >> of cases. >> As far as I can tell, its limitations are exactly what make it useful. > Brian reminded me in the other thread that as long as we voluntarily stick to > `->` style for all cases, we get all of this. So, from my perspective, if we > just adopt a style rule for Google Style that when using switch in an > expression context one should stick to `->`, I might have basically what I > want. yes, but it's what i detest the most about C++, everyone has its own dialect. Rémi
