November 24, 2012
Stumbled into this today:

	http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9068

A workaround is to put the loop in its own function and do a return instead of "break X". Or an uglier workaround is to use a boolean flag checked right after the switch statement.

In my case, I didn't have much to do after the foreach anyway, so the first workaround suffices. In any case, this is a rather ugly bug.


T

-- 
"A one-question geek test. If you get the joke, you're a geek: Seen on a California license plate on a VW Beetle: 'FEATURE'..." -- Joshua D. Wachs - Natural Intelligence, Inc.
November 24, 2012
On 11/24/2012 01:16 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> Stumbled into this today:
>
> 	http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9068
>
> A workaround is to put the loop in its own function and do a return
> instead of "break X". Or an uglier workaround is to use a boolean flag
> checked right after the switch statement.
>

Other workarounds are to include the code that is supposed to be executed after the loop inside the conditional that was supposed to guard the break and then return instead, or to just use goto.

> In my case, I didn't have much to do after the foreach anyway, so the
> first workaround suffices. In any case, this is a rather ugly bug.
>

Yup.

Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home