final switch and straight integers

[Dominikus Dittes Scherkl via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 20 April 2016 at 17:42:03 UTC, Basile Burg wrote:
> On Wednesday, 20 April 2016 at 10:19:17 UTC, Dominikus Dittes 
> Scherkl wrote:
>>
>> 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).
>
> A good `int` value for a variable `int x` can be enforced 
> (min(), max(), clamping, warping, etc) **before** a final 
> switch(x).
No, because final switch requires you to enumerate all possible 
cases.
> If c) is done then the compiler in this cas would disallow 
> something that's completly safe (generally speaking I mean, 
> here safe == no SwitchException possible).
Why would you ever want to use final switch on int? Why not 
simply use the normal switch? Especially if you enforced a useful 
range with min(), max(), etc. would it not be better to do the 
remaining cases manually? (or even do the range check in the 
default case?)