http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4349
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4349
Brad Roberts changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bra...@puremagic.com
--- Comment #6 fro
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4349
Jonathan M Davis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com
--- Comment #5
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4349
--- Comment #4 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-09-28 15:35:45 PDT ---
Walter has now vaguely accepted to require a control statements at the end of
each case.
But some people have asked for an exception to that rule, when a case is empty.
Thi
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4349
--- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-06-21 11:19:01 PDT ---
Answer to Comment 2: I agree that it's easy for people to understand that
there's a requirement to insert a break or similar. This is what I have written
in the Description.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4349
Andrei Alexandrescu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||and...@metalanguage.com
--- Comm
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4349
--- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2010-06-21 03:17:29 PDT ---
Sean Kelly and Michel Fortin have shown some code examples.
This D code:
switch (x) {
case 1: case 2: case 3: case 4:
doSomething();
break;
default:
