final switch and straight integers

[Dominikus Dittes Scherkl via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 20 April 2016 at 07:23:09 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
> On Wednesday, 20 April 2016 at 07:18:55 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo 
> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 20 April 2016 at 06:36:01 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>>> Dominikus Dittes Scherkl:
>>>
>>>> final switch makes no sense on things that are not 
>>>> enumerated. Even on ubyte almost nobody will ever list all 
>>>> 256 cases, not to mention larger types.
>>>
>>> It's easy to cover all the values in a switch, using ranges.
>>
>> 2. No CaseRangeStatements are allowed.
>
> Sorry, pressed Send too early. You mean implement to remove the 
> above limitation?

Anyway, something need to be changed.
a) allow Range Cases (nice for ints but bad idea for enums)
b) require also non-enum types to explicitly state all cases (bad 
idea for any multi-byte type, even near useless for single bytes)
c) forbid other types than enum in final switch

I strongly vote for (c).