catch case as a shorthand for catch and switch case

[Thaina]

As of now C# switch syntax has extended to support many kind of expression. I think it was so overlapped with the old catch syntax

try
{
}
catch(ExceptionA ea)
{
}
catch(ExceptionB eb)
{
}
catch(ExceptionC ec)
{
}
catch(Exception e)
{
    switch(e)
    {
        default:
            throw e;
    }
}

It actually could replace with switch

try
{
}
catch(Exception e)
{
    switch(e)
    {
        case ExceptionA ea:
            break;
        case ExceptionB eb:
            break;
        case ExceptionC ec:
            break;
        default:
            throw e;
    }
}

And I think we could also make the shorthand syntax for convenient

try
{
}
catch(e) // Exception e // dropping extension type as a syntax for switch mode
{
    case ExceptionA ea:
        break;
    case ExceptionB eb:
        break;
    case ExceptionC ec:
        break;
    default:
        throw e;
}

The advantage of switch is it could fall through and could specify additional when. And it will support all kind of switch expression today and future, we don't need to extend support to catch syntax. It just transpiled into switch

[yaakov-h]

The advantage of switch is it could ... specify additional when

How is this an advantage over exception filters (catch (Exception ex) when (...))?

[Thaina]

@yaakov-h Sorry I use the wrong words there. What I meant actually is case pattern

But also I wonder that catch-when would always be the same with case-when forever. Will there be any difference? Or we would always make catch and case always be the same?

[yaakov-h]

catch-when is a fault, as is executed when the exception is thrown.
case-when as it is today would only be executed when the exception is caught, and any syntactic sugar would likely keep that behaviour.