I agree with this. I never use the fallthrough feature because it's backwards from how I think. Trying to detemine where to put the conditions in the tree to effect the correct fall through or breaks is challenging for me. But now it is what it is.
Bob S > On May 24, 2017, at 03:03 , Mark Waddingham via use-livecode > <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > Okay so I was perhaps a little vociferous in what I said... However, > fallthrough is > the key problem - there have been numerous subtle bugs in the engine due to it > (similarly, switch statements without 'default' can cause subtle > bugs too - if you add a value to an enum, but don't update all the switches > which > switch on it). > > Perhaps a better model would be to use 'continue', rather than 'break': > > switch yourName > case "Mark" > -- do something and finish > case "John" > continue > case "Jon" > -- do something else > end switch > > The idea being that 'continue' in a case, jumps to the next choice to check. > This works particularly nicely when you don't have an expression, so the > cases can be expressions as that essentially gives you a 'match' type > construct with back-tracking (quite useful for processing hierarchical arrays > and transforming them - a common operation in writing compilers, for example). > > However, it would probably be better to change the switch syntax to use > different keywords (perhaps choice?). The 'switch'/'case'/'break' paradigm is > so ubiquitous (due to C) that making it work differently would be very > jarring. > > Warmest Regards, > > Mark. > > -- > Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/ > LiveCode: Everyone can create apps _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
