why scope(success)?

[Sean Kelly]

Chris Miller wrote:
> 
> This gives me an idea, how about if there was scope(none) that is just 
> like a regular block, but doesn't create a new scope. This would be for 
> when you only need to group statements but have no interest in a new scope.
> 
> void foo()
> {
>    if(a) scope(none) { stuff(); scope(success) bar(); }
>    baz();
> }
> 
> bar() would execute after baz();

It's a nasty hack, but:

if(!a) goto blah;
scope(success) a.foo();
blah:
...


Sean