No more fall through in case statement?

[0ffh]

Michiel Helvensteijn wrote:
> But the cases are labels. You fall through labels. To change this for
> switches would be inconsistent.

You're quite right.

> Actually, I don't like switch statement syntax at all, really. I don't think
> they should be labels. They should be { } blocks.

Well, if it's not labels anymore, the implicit break option couln't
break consistency, could it? Anyways, I don't want to go on arguing
for a change I'd rather not see implemented, except as a compromise
for those who don't like the implicit fallthrough... =)

regards, frank