On 2008-12-31 18:22:32 -0500, "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructiona...@gmail.com> said:
This wouldn't be any less efficient than any other switch statement; writing
case 2..5:
code;
break;
could just be magically converted into
case 2:
case 3:
case 4:
case 5:
code;
break;
Except that if you want to keep consistency with array slices, 2..5
should probably not include 5 in the range, thus should be equivalent
"case 2,3,4". Unfortunatly, that's generally not what you want when
creating such cases. Imagine writting:
case 'a'..'{':
case 'A'..'[':
Concistent, yes; but not very appealing. What you want to be able to
write is this:
case 'a'..'z':
case 'A'..'Z':
But then it doesn't work as elsewhere in the language anymore.
--
Michel Fortin
michel.for...@michelf.com
http://michelf.com/
