Inside the switch statement

[Ary Borenszweig]

Saaa wrote:
>>> What kind of fall-throughs were these?
>>>
>>> A:
>>>
>>> case value1:
>>> case value2:
>>> case valueN:
>>>     code1();
>>>     break;
>>>
>>> B:
>>>
>>> case value1:
>>>     code1();
>>> case value2:
>>>     code2();
>>>     break;
>> The solution is to forbid fallthrough, and change the switch syntax:
>>
>> switch(value) {
>>   case 1:
>>   case 2:
>> // something
>> break;
>> }
>>
>> gives: Error, missing break at the end of case1.
>>
>> But:
>>
>> switch(value) {
>>   case 1, 2:
>> // something
>> break;
>> }
>>
>> works as expected.
>>
>> What's wrong with that?
> 
> Doesn't support B :)
> 
> How about a warning instead? 

The idea is that it not supporting B is something good.

An error is ok, and if you want to translate C code then it's really 
easy to change the code to not give errors.