Ary Borenszweig wrote:
のしいか (noshiika) escribió:
Thank you for the great work, Walter and all the other contributors.
But I am a bit disappointed with the CaseRangeStatement syntax.
Why is it
case 0: .. case 9:
instead of
case 0 .. 9:
With the latter notation, ranges can be easily used together with
commas, for example:
case 0, 2 .. 4, 6 .. 9:
And CaseRangeStatement, being inconsistent with other syntaxes using
the .. operator, i.e. slicing and ForeachRangeStatement, includes the
endpoint.
Shouldn't D make use of another operator to express ranges that
include the endpoints as Ruby or Perl6 does?
I agree.
I think this syntax is yet another one of those things people looking at
D will say "ugly" and turn their heads away.
When the discussion first came up in the NG, I was a bit sceptical about
Andrei's suggestion for the case range statement as well. Now, I
definitely think it's the best choice, and it's only because I realised
it can be written like this:
case 1:
..
case 4:
// do stuff
Even though it's the same as case 1: .. case 4:, and even though adding
those two newlines is just a visual change, it leaves (to me, at least)
no doubt that this is an inclusive range even though the .. operator is
used, simply because what I would otherwise write is:
case 1:
case 2:
case 3:
case 4:
// do stuff
Also: Thanks for a great release, Walter, Andrei, Don, Sean and everyone
else! (Who else are involved in core development of D2, by the way?) I
am liking this language better and better the more I use it. And now, to
convince the rest of the scientific community that FORTRAN must go...
-Lars
