break seen as a C archaism

[forax at univ-mlv.fr]

----- Mail original -----
> De: "Guy Steele" <guy.steele at oracle.com>
> À: "Remi Forax" <forax at univ-mlv.fr>
> Cc: "mark" <mark at io7m.com>, "amber-spec-experts" <amber-spec-experts at openjdk.java.net>
> Envoyé: Jeudi 15 Mars 2018 20:36:13
> Objet: Re: break seen as a C archaism

>> On Mar 15, 2018, at 3:48 PM, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
>> 
>> ----- Mail original -----
>>> De: "mark" <mark at io7m.com>
>>> À: "amber-spec-experts" <amber-spec-experts at openjdk.java.net>
>>> Envoyé: Jeudi 15 Mars 2018 20:06:40
>>> Objet: Re: break seen as a C archaism
>> 
>>> On 2018-03-15T14:50:45 -0400
>>> Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> If you are reconsidering options, reconsider "yield", meaning
>>>>>   "break current context with this value".
>>>> 
>>>> Still feeling a little burned by first time we floated this, but willing
>>>> to try another run up the flagpole....
>>> 
>>> Silly idea, but... *puts on fireproof suit*:
>>> 
>>> "finally x;"
>> 
>> I believe we can also use any new keywords given that you can not have an
>> identifier followed by an identifier in Java.
>> 
>> by example
>>  pass x;
>>  quit x;
>>  end x;
> 
> Remember that in this situation (switch expressions), `x` can be any expression,
> not just an identifier.
> 
> So “pass x;” cannot be confused with existing syntax, but “pass (x)” can be
> (looks like a method call).
> 
> —Guy

yes, thanks.

Rémi