Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:107578
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <929062F1-E83F-4D81-B2C6-3916B744E101@newclarity.net>
 <5da8e051.1c69fb81.b05ef.ef7dSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <D7C2364B-DA8F-4739-B18E-05D0A841872B@newclarity.net>
 <f40c7f3a-2ae7-8bb6-c2a6-aa8805fb9f01@fischer.name>
 <BD910368-A8B1-48F9-B6A7-C7F2D776E162@newclarity.net>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Message-ID: <11ada3a9-ee9a-1364-7a06-96d1533d544b@alec.pl>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 09:05:59 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BD910368-A8B1-48F9-B6A7-C7F2D776E162@newclarity.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Adding explicit intent for SWITCH/CASE fall through?
From: alec@alec.pl ("A.L.E.C")

On 10/18/19 8:57 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote:
>> Suggestion: `next;` instead?
> 
> I am agnostic about which word is used, so I would open up for suggestions if others think there is a better word than `fallthrough`.
> 
> As far as I care, it could be any of the following[1] as long as the functionality was the same (this is me being a little tongue-in-cheek here):
> 
> - proceed
> - carry_on
> - persevere
> - keep_going
> - go_ahead 
> - advance
> - go_forward
> - keep_on
> - furthermore

Or "pass", but very good candidate for consistency should be "continue". Of course that
would be a big BC break.

Imo, this would make more sense if fallthrough did something more, e.g. allowing

case X:
	if (something) {
		fallthrough;
        }
	something-else;
	break;
case Y: ....

Going this way we could imagine that `fallthrough N` could allow skipping N following
`case`s and `fallthrough default` jumping to the default section. Then, don't we need a
way to jump outside of the whole switch statement? Ah, there's `goto` already. So, maybe
extend `goto` somehow?

I'm just throwing some ideas to consider, I don't pretend they are good. Adding a no-op
keyword does not make much sense to me. It might be not useful enough to justify a BC
break. You could call it "noop" as well.

-- 
Aleksander 'A.L.E.C' Machniak
Kolab Groupware Developer         [http://kolab.org]
Roundcube Webmail Developer   [http://roundcube.net]
----------------------------------------------------
PGP: 19359DC1 # Blog: https://kolabian.wordpress.com