Thus it was written in the epistle of Damian Conway,
>
> But a switch is not a loop.
> Within a loop the logic is:
>
> next -> try next case
> last -> this was the last case
As it has already caused a little confusion, could we go with another word
instead of next? 'fallthrough' seems a bit much to type. How about 'proceed',
'fall', 'exinde', 'porro', or (my favorite at the moment) 'pergo' ;-).
> > this would mean that fallthrough would be the default and the user
> > would need a last; to break out;
>
> Long and bitter experience indicates that fallthrough is a poor default
> (but a good *option*).
Righto. Well said,
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==========================================================
I think that there is a moral to this story, namely that it is more
important to have beauty in one's equations that to have them fit
experiment. . . . It seems that if one is working from the point of view of
getting beauty in one's equations, and if one has really a sound insight,
one is on a sure line of progress.
-- Dirac, Paul Adrien Maurice (1902- )
==========================================================
Deep thoughts to be found at http://www.southern.edu/~ashted
