Bug 200 – Statement *must* follow label

This one is pretty simple. The parser seems to think that the only valid way to use a label is if a statement directly follows it. But shouldn't a label be valid all by itself, if its the last line of a scope? void main(){ x: } test.d(3): found '}' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement test.d(3): found 'EOF' instead of statement The workaround for this one is dead simple: just use a ';' right after the label. IMO, that doesn't look like valid code. void main(){ x: ; }

The spec gives: LabelledStatement: Identifier ':' Statement i.e. a label prefixes a statement - it doesn't act as a statement by itself. (In reply to comment #0) > The workaround for this one is dead simple: just use a ';' right after the > label. IMO, that doesn't look like valid code. Indeed, it isn't according to the spec, and for good reasons. Use an empty BlockStatement instead. void main() { x: {} }

Fixed DMD 0.162 (changed spec to allow ';' as empty statement after label)