No more fall through in case statement?

[0ffh]

Janice Caron wrote:
> On 1/3/08, 0ffh <frank at youknow.what.todo.internetz> wrote:
>> To me, a warning on nonempty case fallthrough seems more than enough...
> 
> I'm sure you know this already, but: "Warnings are not a defined part
> of the D Programming Language."
> (http://digitalmars.com/d/warnings.html)

Right-ho! I do, but I was thinking of C#, what the article was about. =)
Actually, I think that "no warnings" is a mistake, as is "no inline".

> [...]
> 
> For example:
> 
>     case 1:
>         /*...*/
>         /* falls through */
>     case 2:
>         /*...*/
>        break;
>     case 3
>     {
>         /*...*/
>     }
>         /* does not fall through */
> 
> [...]
> Everyone's happy. (Maybe?)

I like it as it is. If it absolutely has to be changed, why not
replace the explicit break with an implicit break and make fall-
through explicit? Liek so:

   case 1:
     /*...*/
     fallthrough; // falls through
   case 2:
     /*...*/
     // no fallthrough -> implicit break
   case ...

I could live with that as a compromise...

regards, frank