Is there ANY chance we can fix the bitwise operator precedence rules?

[KennyTM~]

On Jun 19, 10 07:17, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>
>> 2) switch cases that don't end with goto or break:
>>
>> void main() {
>>      int x, y;
>>      switch (x) {
>>          case 0: y++;
>>          default: y--;
>>      }
>> }
>
> I, for one, _want_ case statements to be able to fall through. It would be
> horribly painful in many cases if they couldn't. Now, requiring a separate
> statement like fallthrough or somesuch instead of break might not be a bad
> idea, but requiring that each case end with a break would seriously restrict
> the usefulness of switch statements.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

This "fallthrough" statement already exists.

     switch (x) {
        case 0:
          do_something();
          goto case;
        case 1:
          do_more_thing();
          goto case;
        case 2:
          done();
          break;
        default:
          error();
          break;
     }