> On 13 Oct 2016, at 12:26, Alex Blewitt <alb...@apple.com> wrote:
> On 13 Oct 2016, at 11:06, Haravikk via swift-evolution 
> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote:
>>> On 11 Oct 2016, at 19:43, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution 
>>> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote:
>>> I thought this was long gone but today I found out it is still legal:
>>> switch i {
>>> case 4 ... 6: ()
>>> case 3: print("Here")
>>> default: break
>>> }
>>> Is there a motivating factor for keeping this in the language? The compiler 
>>> picks up on Void and emits an error. You'd think () would produce the same 
>>> results but it doesn't.
>>> — Erica
>> Hopefully I'm not the only one but… how are we supposed to be doing this? 
>> Because () is exactly what I've been using the entire time for cases that I 
>> want to ignore (or are handled in code outside the switch). I'm going to 
>> have a few dozen files to edit if there's something else I'm supposed to be 
>> using… 
> You can have a 'break' there, which is equivalent to a nop but without a 
> return value. Whether that's what you're supposed to do or not is a different 
> issue :)

Perhaps too philosophical a question? ^^

You're right though, I probably should be using breaks as they're more 
explicit, and I suppose fallthrough should work too so all cases should be 
covered without having to use (), in that case it maybe is something worth 
getting rid of?
swift-evolution mailing list

Reply via email to