On 01-06-2013 11:43, bearophile wrote:
Alex Rønne Petersen:final switch (insn.op) { case imm: lbl = &&handle_imm; break; case add: lbl = &&handle_add; break; case sub: lbl = &&handle_sub; break; // ... case ret: lbl = &&handle_ret; break;Regarding the syntax, why do you use "&&"? Isn't a single "&" enough? case imm: lbl = &handle_imm; break; If such gotos become a natural part of the D syntax then it's not necessary to copy the GNU C syntax. Bye, bearophile
I just used the GNU C syntax because I was familiar with it. I don't particularly care how it ends up looking in D. But Timon makes a good point about namespaces.
-- Alex Rønne Petersen [email protected] / [email protected] http://alexrp.com / http://lycus.org
