Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

Pseudocode "Break" Omission

See original GitHub issue

Challenge Adding a default option in Switch statements

In this challenge’s pseudocode it does omits the “break;” statement where it is needed. This may be obvious and it’s not a “bug” per se but I’m sure it could confuse some users who are new to programming.

Side note:

LOVE THIS SITE!!! THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK!!!

switch (num) {
  case value1:
    statement1;
    break;
  case value2:
    statement2;
    break;
...
  default:
    defaultStatement;
}

edit: challenge is still passable, is break unecessary? sorry for the confusion.

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 6 years ago
Comments:9 (9 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

2reactions

raisedadeadcommented, May 31, 2017

Hi @krisb1220

freeCodeCamp ❤️ you too! And thanks for reporting the issue.

In this challenge’s pseudocode it does omits the “break;” statement where it is needed.

Both the case statements in the pseudo code have break statements. I am not sure what are you referring to.

Can you please clarify more?

1reaction

Greenheartcommented, Jul 19, 2017

I think we could add a break statement to the default case to make it clearer.

The fact that it’s possible to omit break statements in some cases (for the last case, for default or when using return in case blocks) is a detail that campers can learn in the future.

I’d say we can open this for first time contributors! 🙂