On Jan 25, 2013 12:24 AM, "Nelson, Jim" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't know if it's been discussed for Vala, but I can assure you the debate over switch fallthrough has been discussed to death.
Yes. This is a sensitive issue as many have strong feelings about this. That is why I was hoping it would be possible to please everybody. > I find the Vala approach to be quite sane. As a long-time C/C++ programmer, I've been burned one too many times by switch fallthrough. I can't recall any instance where it actually was necessary. By necessary I mean the other approaches were worse in measurable terms, not code aesthetics, which is more subjective than people think. There are cases, but they are not common. > > I don't like the warning solution you suggested earlier. When it comes to syntax, if Vala supports or doesn't support something, I would rather it be firm about it. Deprecated syntax is the only time I can think a warning makes sense. I am used to C and GCC where warnings can be swiched on or off with compiler flags. This would somehow justify it, but it is not perfect. > > I wouldn't cry if nobreak was introduced, but I would question it. One thing about the C# syntax, as ugly as it may be, is that it allows jumping to any other label, not merely falling through to the next. I could see two or more case blocks wanting to jump to the default block. Of course, with this kind of power comes a lot of potential for abuse. Which is why I try to avoid goto unless I write low level code. To me, the worst abuse is bad indentation. Too bad Vala didn't solve that. I also dislike operator overloading, overriding and public/global variables, comparing floats with ints, use of basic types when one could be specific, not using const keyword, dead or duplicated code, etc. As a software system designer, I have seen very poor coding habits, and can give many examples. When each person has their own style in common code, the result ends up unreadable. I think this nobreak would be clean, but it is always a bad side-effect when changes are introduced, but I think this would not cause big problems since "nobreak" is not a popular variable name. > > I recommend getting buy-in from the Vala maintainers before working on a patch. Yes. They need to be convinced and I am generally bad at convincing people. But I have been thinking about this for some time and could not find any good arguments to not implement it. But maybe there is a better way to solve this than with a new keyword.
_______________________________________________ vala-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
