[cogman10]

Updates to languages (don't know where C# is on this) have different types of switch statements that eliminate the `break` problem.

For example, with java there's enhanced switch that looks like this

    var val = switch(foo) {
     case 1, 2, 3 -> bar;
     case 4 -> baz;
     default -> {
       yield bat();
     }
    }

The C style switch break stuff is definitely a language mistake.

[neonsunset]

C# has switch statements which are C/C++ style switches and switch expressions which are like Rust's match except no control flow statements inside:

    var len = slice switch
    {
        null => 0,
        "Hello" or "World" => 1,
        ['@', ..var tags] => tags.Length,
        ['{', ..var body, '}'] => body.Length,
        _ => slice.Length,
    };

(it supports a lot more patterns but that wouldn't fit)

[wvenable]

C# has both switch expressions like this and also break statements are not optional in traditional switch statements so it actually solves both problems. You can't get too clever with switch statements in C#.

However most languages have pretty permissive switch statements just like C.

[tombert]

Yeah, fair, it's been awhile since I've done any C#, so my memory is a bit hazy with the details. I've been burned C with switch statements so I have a pretty strong distaste for them.

[smaudet]

I think using C as your language with which to judge language constructs is hardly fair - one of its main strengths has been as a fairly stable, unchanging code-to-compiler contract, i.e. little to none syntax change or improvements.

So no offense, but I would revisit the wider world of language constructs before claiming that switch statements are "all bad". There are plenty of bad languages or languages with poor implementations of syntax, that do not make the fundamental language construct bad.

[gloryjulio]

This is just forcing return value. You either have to break or return at the branches. To me they all look equivalent