>    >  If you take this logic to the extreme, you should not be allowed to write:
>    > if (...) {
>    >     break;
>    > }

> You can't

You can:

while(true)

{

if(true)

{

                                break;

                }

}

But that’s beside the point, it’s a red herring.

The point being that there’s a gap in the ability to properly express intent on how the code should progress, to do something that would otherwise be valid.

Let’s imagine a scenario where the keyword “return” didn’t exist and we had to use “break” instead to prematurely return from a function.

All of a sudden you couldn’t do a premature return from within a while/for/switch.

Someone could still argue: “IMHO, this violates the idea of scope encapsulation. The loop/scope should not know or care what the outer function is doing nor why.  And vise-versa.  Just because you can does not mean you should.”

But lets be honest; We have all done that!, and we wouldn’t have it any other way.