further simplification of switch() syntax c#

[vsfeedback]

This issue has been moved from a ticket on Developer Community.

---

Assuming the following hypothetical:

internal enum SystemStatus { Unknown, On, Off }
internal class SystemManager
{
    static void Main()
    {
        ToggleSystem();
        ToggleSystem();

    }

    private static SystemStatus _status = SystemStatus.Off;

    internal static void ToggleSystem()
    {
        switch (_status)
        {
            case SystemStatus.On: ShutDown(); LogEvent("Turned off"); break;
            case SystemStatus.Off: StartUp(); LogEvent("Turned on"); break;
            default: NotifyMaintenance("System Status Unknown"); LogEvent("Error"); break;
        }
    }

    private void ShutDown() => _status = SystemStatus.Off;
    private void StartUp() => _status = SystemStatus.On;
    private void NotifyMaintenance(string statusMessage) { }
    private void LogEvent(string e) { Console.WriteLine(e); }
}

I'd like to see the switch block simplified:

// the Type is implicit, so why repeat it for every case (make it optional if it helps clarity)?
// => { } flags this as a statement block, so "break;" isn't needed
//        (but it could be optionally included as well)

switch(currentStatus) /* optional: */ using SystemStatus
{
    .On => { Shutdown(); LogEvent("Turned off"); },
    .Off => { StartUp(); LogEvent("Turned on"); },
    _ =>
    { 
        NotifyMaintenance("System Status Unknown");
        LogEvent("Error"); 
        break; //optional
    }
}

This could also accommodate multiple statements.

internal static void CheckStatus()
{ 
    switch (_status)
    {
        [.On, .Off] => { LogEvent($"Status: {_status}"); },
        _ => { NotifyMaintenance("System Status Unknown"); LogEvent("Maintenance notified"); },
    }
}

---

Original Comments

Feedback Bot on 6/9/2022, 08:12 PM:

(private comment, text removed)

[BreyerW]

With expression switch you can already use or keyword AFAIK to achieve multiple statements example, only problem being u cant have void returning expression so your last example cant be converted but void switch expression was proposed already.

As for simplification: #2926

[333fred]

See both #3037 and #3038