On Oct 27, 2008, at 8:21 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
As I say, I'm not really in favor of this semantics. I think it's
too complicated and bifurcates the meaning of `break'. The fact is
if you write:
case 1:
if (p()) {
f();
g();
break;
}
// fall through
case 2:
then the call to g() is in tail position, but the `break' is
inarguably a jump.
I would argue it. You can either equivalently consider the fall
through to be a jump, or say it behaves as if the code of case 2
"as if the code of case 2 were duplicated into case 1"
- Maciej
_______________________________________________
Es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
