X-Received: by 10.182.251.135 with SMTP id zk7mr2997399obc.14.1407864666189; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:31:06 -0700 (PDT)
Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!h18no12177193igc.0!news-out.google.com!j6ni45219qas.0!nntp.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 12:31:05 -0500
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 20:30:54 +0300
From: Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: local constants with switch
References: <slrnlukhpi.fp3.avl@login.logic.tuwien.ac.at>
In-Reply-To: <slrnlukhpi.fp3.avl@login.logic.tuwien.ac.at>
Message-ID: <ejvpbb-g5s.ln1@tempest.fredriksson.dy.fi>
Lines: 24
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-eoRQDRnpaWjdjnfDLP55LO+JDsomn3bNs2Jcp+ez6vg6k4PgBvpMnNQJfM7El+d3S6LOsUlhswmuVr6!9Q5m/4V//A1zFHrkcNzGii5r9WMEVGRHJD7o3FYHm0QVcMRTH1mhdIWdcc/2XPtky8Nn2A==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2188
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:29644

12.08.2014, 19:56, Andreas Leitgeb kirjoitti:
> It never before occurred to me, that one could define a local constant
> within a method (e.g.: final int foo = 42;) AND use it for a case label
> in a switch statement.
> 
> I'm a bit curious about whether this is an old-age feature that I've
> been missing out for a very long time, or if this just came in recently...
> 
> I had a look at the JLS, too: the description of switch(§14.11) refers to
> term constant expression (§15.28), which further refers to constant
> variables (§4.12.4), which is about final variables generally.
> 
> From that it wouldn't even be necessary for that variable to be itself
> initialized with a constant expression, but I probably just missed that
> wording, because it (expectably) doesn't work with a final whose initial
> value is not a constant expression itself, nor with a final variable
> that isn't immediately initialized.
> 

Scope. If it is in the scope it is valid.

-- 

You will gain money by an immoral action.