switch()

[Ary Borenszweig]

On 2/17/14, 7:31 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 2/17/2014 5:48 AM, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
>> On 2/16/14, 5:03 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> It originally was not required, but there was a campaign by a lot of D
>>> users to make it required to deal with the common bug of adding a value
>>> in one switch statement but forgetting to add it to another
>>> corresponding one.
>>
>> Could you show an example of such scenario? I don't get it.
>
> Having a set of bit flags, and adding another bit flag later, and
> failing to account for that in existing switch statements.

auto bit_flag = ...;
switch(bit_flag) {
    case old_bit_flag_1:
      // do something
      break;
    case old_bit_flag_2:
      // do something
      break;
    default:
      break;
}

Now suppose bit_flag can get an additional "new_bit_flag" value. How 
does "default" helps me notice that I'm supposed to add it to that 
switch statement?

I still can't see your point :-(

Maybe I need some more example code to understand it.