Bill Baxter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> I was hoping the lesson learned would be to fix switch as was suggested.
>>> I checked, because it wasn't written in the way I usually write things,
>>> and sure enough it wasn't code I wrote :-)
>>>
>>>  From the changelog for D 0.129: "Incorporated Ben Hinkle's new std.format
>>> which can print general arrays."
>>>
>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new0129
>> So people are liable to make the mistake.
>>
>> Andrei
>>
> 
> What about when you want to fall through to a multiple label?  Or a range label?
> 
> case 0:
>     // do stuff
>     goto case ??;
> case 1: .. case 9:
>      // do more stuff
>      goto case ??;
> case 10,20,30:
>      // still more stuff
> 
> The obvious answer would seem to be just "pick any one".
> I just bring it up because I haven't seen that ... uh case ...
> mentioned by anyone.
> 
> --bb

You must pick the median :o).

Andrei

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:30 AM, KennyTM~ <kennytm@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 09 01:12, Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I was hoping the lesson learned would be to fix switch as was suggested.
>>>>
>>>> I checked, because it wasn't written in the way I usually write things, and sure enough it wasn't code I wrote :-)
>>>>
>>>>  From the changelog for D 0.129: "Incorporated Ben Hinkle's new
>>>> std.format
>>>> which can print general arrays."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new0129
>>>
>>> So people are liable to make the mistake.
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>
>> What about when you want to fall through to a multiple label?  Or a range label?
>>
>> case 0:
>>     // do stuff
>>     goto case ??;
>> case 1: .. case 9:
>>      // do more stuff
>>      goto case ??;
>> case 10,20,30:
>>      // still more stuff
>>
>> The obvious answer would seem to be just "pick any one".
>> I just bring it up because I haven't seen that ... uh case ...
>> mentioned by anyone.
>>
>> --bb
>
> Since
>
> case a:
> ..
> case b:
>
> expands to
>
> case a:
> case a+1:
> case a+2:
> // ....
> case b:
>
> and
>
> case a,b,c,d:
>
> expands to
>
> case a:
> case b:
> case c:
> case d:
>
> Your speculation is correct. Please note that the "goto case X;" statement works *now*, so there's no need to guess its behavior.

Seriously?  Didn't realize.

So valid end-of-case statements would be:
   break;
   return;
   continue;
   goto *;
   goto case *;
And if you don't have one of those then it's an error?

Could this get into difficult-to-verify territory?  And therefore be
difficult to implement?
It looks like the exact same problem as enforcing that all code paths
return a value, which is something I think D doesn't currently enforce
because it's too hard.   So you run into Walter's dislike for
errors/warnings that are incorrect because the compiler is too stupid.


--bb

Bill Baxter:

> Could this get into difficult-to-verify territory?  And therefore be
> difficult to implement?
> It looks like the exact same problem as enforcing that all code paths
> return a value, which is something I think D doesn't currently enforce
> because it's too hard.   So you run into Walter's dislike for
> errors/warnings that are incorrect because the compiler is too stupid.

If someone writes a switch case so complex that the compiler isn't able to understand if it's a fall-through or not, then that's a sign that the code needs to be improved/simplified :-)

Bye,
bearophile

On Nov 17, 09 01:48, Bill Baxter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:30 AM, KennyTM~<kennytm@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On Nov 17, 09 01:12, Bill Baxter wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org>    wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was hoping the lesson learned would be to fix switch as was
>>>>>> suggested.
>>>>>
>>>>> I checked, because it wasn't written in the way I usually write things,
>>>>> and sure enough it wasn't code I wrote :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>   From the changelog for D 0.129: "Incorporated Ben Hinkle's new
>>>>> std.format
>>>>> which can print general arrays."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new0129
>>>>
>>>> So people are liable to make the mistake.
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>>
>>>
>>> What about when you want to fall through to a multiple label?  Or a range
>>> label?
>>>
>>> case 0:
>>>      // do stuff
>>>      goto case ??;
>>> case 1: .. case 9:
>>>       // do more stuff
>>>       goto case ??;
>>> case 10,20,30:
>>>       // still more stuff
>>>
>>> The obvious answer would seem to be just "pick any one".
>>> I just bring it up because I haven't seen that ... uh case ...
>>> mentioned by anyone.
>>>
>>> --bb
>>
>> Since
>>
>> case a:
>> ..
>> case b:
>>
>> expands to
>>
>> case a:
>> case a+1:
>> case a+2:
>> // ....
>> case b:
>>
>> and
>>
>> case a,b,c,d:
>>
>> expands to
>>
>> case a:
>> case b:
>> case c:
>> case d:
>>
>> Your speculation is correct. Please note that the "goto case X;" statement
>> works *now*, so there's no need to guess its behavior.
>
> Seriously?  Didn't realize.
>
> So valid end-of-case statements would be:
>     break;
>     return;
>     continue;
>     goto *;
>     goto case *;

throw ...;
assert(...);

> And if you don't have one of those then it's an error?
>
> Could this get into difficult-to-verify territory?  And therefore be
> difficult to implement?
> It looks like the exact same problem as enforcing that all code paths
> return a value, which is something I think D doesn't currently enforce
> because it's too hard.   So you run into Walter's dislike for
> errors/warnings that are incorrect because the compiler is too stupid.
>
>
> --bb

But DMD already has the "no return at end of function" warning.

On Nov 17, 09 01:40, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>> I was hoping the lesson learned would be to fix switch as was
>>>>> suggested.
>>>> I checked, because it wasn't written in the way I usually write things,
>>>> and sure enough it wasn't code I wrote :-)
>>>>
>>>> From the changelog for D 0.129: "Incorporated Ben Hinkle's new
>>>> std.format
>>>> which can print general arrays."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new0129
>>> So people are liable to make the mistake.
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>
>> What about when you want to fall through to a multiple label? Or a
>> range label?
>>
>> case 0:
>> // do stuff
>> goto case ??;
>> case 1: .. case 9:
>> // do more stuff
>> goto case ??;
>> case 10,20,30:
>> // still more stuff
>>
>> The obvious answer would seem to be just "pick any one".
>> I just bring it up because I haven't seen that ... uh case ...
>> mentioned by anyone.
>>
>> --bb
>
> You must pick the median :o).
>
> Andrei

No way we'll need to write "goto case 3.5;" :p

KennyTM~ wrote:
> On Nov 17, 09 01:48, Bill Baxter wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:30 AM, KennyTM~<kennytm@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> On Nov 17, 09 01:12, Bill Baxter wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was hoping the lesson learned would be to fix switch as was suggested.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I checked, because it wasn't written in the way I usually write
>>>>>> things,
>>>>>> and sure enough it wasn't code I wrote :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   From the changelog for D 0.129: "Incorporated Ben Hinkle's new
>>>>>> std.format
>>>>>> which can print general arrays."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new0129
>>>>>
>>>>> So people are liable to make the mistake.
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrei
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What about when you want to fall through to a multiple label?  Or a
>>>> range
>>>> label?
>>>>
>>>> case 0:
>>>>      // do stuff
>>>>      goto case ??;
>>>> case 1: .. case 9:
>>>>       // do more stuff
>>>>       goto case ??;
>>>> case 10,20,30:
>>>>       // still more stuff
>>>>
>>>> The obvious answer would seem to be just "pick any one".
>>>> I just bring it up because I haven't seen that ... uh case ...
>>>> mentioned by anyone.
>>>>
>>>> --bb
>>>
>>> Since
>>>
>>> case a:
>>> ..
>>> case b:
>>>
>>> expands to
>>>
>>> case a:
>>> case a+1:
>>> case a+2:
>>> // ....
>>> case b:
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> case a,b,c,d:
>>>
>>> expands to
>>>
>>> case a:
>>> case b:
>>> case c:
>>> case d:
>>>
>>> Your speculation is correct. Please note that the "goto case X;"
>>> statement
>>> works *now*, so there's no need to guess its behavior.
>>
>> Seriously?  Didn't realize.
>>
>> So valid end-of-case statements would be:
>>     break;
>>     return;
>>     continue;
>>     goto *;
>>     goto case *;
> 
> throw ...;
> assert(...);
> 

you can call functions which do these...

Bill Baxter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:30 AM, KennyTM~ <kennytm@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 17, 09 01:12, Bill Baxter wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org>  wrote:
>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>>> I was hoping the lesson learned would be to fix switch as was
>>>>>> suggested.
>>>>> I checked, because it wasn't written in the way I usually write things,
>>>>> and sure enough it wasn't code I wrote :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>  From the changelog for D 0.129: "Incorporated Ben Hinkle's new
>>>>> std.format
>>>>> which can print general arrays."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new0129
>>>> So people are liable to make the mistake.
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>>
>>> What about when you want to fall through to a multiple label?  Or a range
>>> label?
>>>
>>> case 0:
>>>     // do stuff
>>>     goto case ??;
>>> case 1: .. case 9:
>>>      // do more stuff
>>>      goto case ??;
>>> case 10,20,30:
>>>      // still more stuff
>>>
>>> The obvious answer would seem to be just "pick any one".
>>> I just bring it up because I haven't seen that ... uh case ...
>>> mentioned by anyone.
>>>
>>> --bb
>> Since
>>
>> case a:
>> ..
>> case b:
>>
>> expands to
>>
>> case a:
>> case a+1:
>> case a+2:
>> // ....
>> case b:
>>
>> and
>>
>> case a,b,c,d:
>>
>> expands to
>>
>> case a:
>> case b:
>> case c:
>> case d:
>>
>> Your speculation is correct. Please note that the "goto case X;" statement
>> works *now*, so there's no need to guess its behavior.
> 
> Seriously?  Didn't realize.
> 
> So valid end-of-case statements would be:
>    break;
>    return;
>    continue;
>    goto *;
>    goto case *;
> And if you don't have one of those then it's an error?

throw *;


> Could this get into difficult-to-verify territory?  And therefore be
> difficult to implement?
> It looks like the exact same problem as enforcing that all code paths
> return a value, which is something I think D doesn't currently enforce
> because it's too hard.   So you run into Walter's dislike for
> errors/warnings that are incorrect because the compiler is too stupid.

It could enter difficult territory if the rule was:

if (condition) break;

and leave it to the compiler to prove that condition is always true. That's not the case with the proposed change. All control flow statements you enumerated above transfer flow unconditionally.


Andrei

KennyTM~ wrote:
> On Nov 17, 09 01:40, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:
>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>>> I was hoping the lesson learned would be to fix switch as was
>>>>>> suggested.
>>>>> I checked, because it wasn't written in the way I usually write things,
>>>>> and sure enough it wasn't code I wrote :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> From the changelog for D 0.129: "Incorporated Ben Hinkle's new
>>>>> std.format
>>>>> which can print general arrays."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new0129
>>>> So people are liable to make the mistake.
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>>
>>>
>>> What about when you want to fall through to a multiple label? Or a
>>> range label?
>>>
>>> case 0:
>>> // do stuff
>>> goto case ??;
>>> case 1: .. case 9:
>>> // do more stuff
>>> goto case ??;
>>> case 10,20,30:
>>> // still more stuff
>>>
>>> The obvious answer would seem to be just "pick any one".
>>> I just bring it up because I haven't seen that ... uh case ...
>>> mentioned by anyone.
>>>
>>> --bb
>>
>> You must pick the median :o).
>>
>> Andrei
> 
> No way we'll need to write "goto case 3.5;" :p

(Just for precision's sake)

median != average

Andrei

On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:37:52 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:

> KennyTM~ wrote:
>> On Nov 17, 09 01:40, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> You must pick the median :o).
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>  No way we'll need to write "goto case 3.5;" :p
>
> (Just for precision's sake)
>
> median != average

You're mean!

-Steve

Ellery Newcomer wrote:
> KennyTM~ wrote:
>> On Nov 17, 09 01:48, Bill Baxter wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:30 AM, KennyTM~<kennytm@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>> On Nov 17, 09 01:12, Bill Baxter wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org>    wrote:
>>>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>>>>> I was hoping the lesson learned would be to fix switch as was
>>>>>>>> suggested.
>>>>>>> I checked, because it wasn't written in the way I usually write
>>>>>>> things,
>>>>>>> and sure enough it wasn't code I wrote :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   From the changelog for D 0.129: "Incorporated Ben Hinkle's new
>>>>>>> std.format
>>>>>>> which can print general arrays."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new0129
>>>>>> So people are liable to make the mistake.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrei
>>>>>>
>>>>> What about when you want to fall through to a multiple label?  Or a
>>>>> range
>>>>> label?
>>>>>
>>>>> case 0:
>>>>>      // do stuff
>>>>>      goto case ??;
>>>>> case 1: .. case 9:
>>>>>       // do more stuff
>>>>>       goto case ??;
>>>>> case 10,20,30:
>>>>>       // still more stuff
>>>>>
>>>>> The obvious answer would seem to be just "pick any one".
>>>>> I just bring it up because I haven't seen that ... uh case ...
>>>>> mentioned by anyone.
>>>>>
>>>>> --bb
>>>> Since
>>>>
>>>> case a:
>>>> ..
>>>> case b:
>>>>
>>>> expands to
>>>>
>>>> case a:
>>>> case a+1:
>>>> case a+2:
>>>> // ....
>>>> case b:
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>> case a,b,c,d:
>>>>
>>>> expands to
>>>>
>>>> case a:
>>>> case b:
>>>> case c:
>>>> case d:
>>>>
>>>> Your speculation is correct. Please note that the "goto case X;"
>>>> statement
>>>> works *now*, so there's no need to guess its behavior.
>>> Seriously?  Didn't realize.
>>>
>>> So valid end-of-case statements would be:
>>>     break;
>>>     return;
>>>     continue;
>>>     goto *;
>>>     goto case *;
>> throw ...;
>> assert(...);
>>
> 
> you can call functions which do these...

... which is where the "none"/"bottom" type comes into play!

Andrei