Is there ANY chance we can fix the bitwise operator precedence rules?

[Leandro Lucarella]

Lars T. Kyllingstad, el 22 de junio a las 09:14 me escribiste:
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:27:32 -0700, Bill Baxter wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Leandro Lucarella <luca at llucax.com.ar>
> > wrote:
> >> Bill Baxter, el 21 de junio a las 17:13 me escribiste:
> >>> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Leandro Lucarella
> >>> <luca at llucax.com.ar> wrote:
> >>> > goto next case; is a little more verbose but very clear to me :)
> >>> >
> >>> > Maybe just next case; is a shorter alternative...
> >>>
> >>> That would be great if "next" were a D keyword.  But I don't think
> >>> you're going to get Walter to add a keyword just for this.
> >>
> >> Damn! Where did I get next from? I don't know...
> > 
> > I think it's a keyword in Perl maybe?
> > 
> > --bb
> 
> It is a keyword in BASIC, at least. :)
> 
>   FOR i = 1 TO 100
>     PRINT i
>   NEXT

I'm sure it's Perl, even when I written Basic (GW and Q) code,
I remember it having the same meaning as C's "continue".

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
According to several sources
Dr. Harvey Kellogg tried to make a cure for masturbation
When he made cornflakes