Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Walter Bright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
grauzone wrote:
I oriented this on the syntax of array slices. Which work that way. Not
inconsistent at all. It's also consistent with foreach(_; x..y).
It would look consistent, but it would behave very differently. x..y for
foreach and slices is exclusive of the y, while case x..y is inclusive.
The current way has that inconsistency:
variable .. variable // exclusive end
caseLabel .. caseLabel // inclusive end
And yes, I know that's not how it's actually parsed, but that's how people
visually parse it.
I don't think so at all. There's a lot of punctuation that has different
roles depending on the context. For example, ":" means key/value
separator or ternary operator participant; "*" means multiplication or
pointer dereference; "&" means taking address or binary "and"... plenty
of examples. So you can't center on ".." and claim that it visually
means the same thing even though the surrounding is different. You
really have no argument here.
Ah the hell with it, I don't care any more: The *real* issue here is that
the current switch, being based on C's, is horribly antiquated and what we
really need is a comprehensive redesign incorporating some sort of
generalized pattern matching. Like "case > 1, <= 10:" or something like
Nemerle, or whatever. I don't care, as long as it doesn't continue to get
trivialized as something that can be solved by tossing in a recycled ".."
here, a recycled "final" there, etc.
On the full side of the glass, with the latest dmd release, the language
has acquired some useful feature improvements and the implementation has
fixed many bugs. Why the crankiness?
Andrei
