Even if it is legal, mixing case and non-case labels in the body of a switch statement is very confusing and can even be the result of a typing
error.
Noncompliant code example
Case 1, the code is syntactically correct but the behavior is not the expected one
switch (day) {
case MONDAY:
case TUESDAY:
WEDNESDAY: // instead of "case WEDNESDAY"
doSomething();
break;
...
}
Case 2, the code is correct and behaves as expected but is hardly readable
switch (day) {
case MONDAY:
break;
case TUESDAY:
foo:for(i = 0 ; i < X ; i++) {
/* ... */
break foo; // this break statement doesn't relate to the nesting case TUESDAY
/* ... */
}
break;
/* ... */
}
Compliant solution
Case 1
switch (day) {
case MONDAY:
case TUESDAY:
case WEDNESDAY:
doSomething();
break;
...
}
Case 2
switch (day) {
case MONDAY:
break;
case TUESDAY:
compute(args); // put the content of the labelled "for" statement in a dedicated method
break;
/* ... */
}
