Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:107569
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <929062F1-E83F-4D81-B2C6-3916B744E101@newclarity.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 22:42:34 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <929062F1-E83F-4D81-B2C6-3916B744E101@newclarity.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Adding explicit intent for SWITCH/CASE fall through?
From: marandall@php.net (Mark Randall)
Message-ID: <php.internals-107569@news.php.net>

On 17/10/2019 21:54, Mike Schinkel wrote:
> Additionally it could be added in 8.0 and then in 8.1 flagged with a warning when a CASE does not have one for the two, but only if people don't object to this. While I know some on this list feel strongly that warnings must come with to future plans to generate errors I would personally be 100% okay if it indefinitely generated only a warning.

Would you put this at switch level, or case level?

Unless your plan is to redefine how switch works by default, which would 
be quite ambitious, I'm not sure it makes a great deal of sense to add a 
token that would effectively no-op in all circumstances.

It sounds like a job for a static analysis comment:

/** @DisableSwitchStatementFallthroughWarning */
switch ($x) {
   case 1:
     $x = doSomething();

   case 2:
     doLaLaLaLa();
     break;

   default:
     doTralala();
}

--
Mark Randall