Out of topic but the syntax could be used for the “break” and “continue” statements as well:

for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++ i)
  for (int j = 0; j < 10; ++ j)
    if (j == 5)
      break(1); // breaks out if both loops
    else
      continue(0); // resume inner loop

I had this idea for a long time...

-- 
Phil Bouchard
Founder
C.: (819) 328-4743
> On Oct 5, 2019, at 1:43 AM, Phil Bouchard <phil_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> It can't break the standards because you're adding a new syntax, you're not replacing one or hijacking the template token types.
> 
> For the rest maybe I can help but you seem to be more aware of the latest standards than I am.
> 
> Also IMO this is really important in order to keep the standards as clean and simple as possible.
> 
> 
> 
>> On 10/5/19 1:37 AM, Brian Bi wrote:
>> I'd be willing to write a proposal but it would be a lot of work, so I'm curious whether people think this would be something good to have in addition to P0847, before I go ahead and write it up.
>> 
>>> On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 12:19 AM Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> Are we moving forward with the syntax Brian suggested? It seems good to me...
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 10/4/19 11:31 AM, Phil Bouchard wrote:
>>>> But Brian came up with a better syntax.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> Phil Bouchard
>>> Founder
>>> C.: (819) 328-4743
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Brian Bi
> -- 
> 
> Phil Bouchard
> Founder
> C.: (819) 328-4743
>