Do not indent switch when used in beginControlFlow

[JakeWharton]

If the string starts with "switch " then do not automatically indent. Downside: we would have to maintain a boolean stack of calls to beginControlFlow such that on symmetric calls to nextControlFlow/endControlFlow know whether or not to unindent. As a result, this may not be worth doing! And that's fine.

This syntactical formatting oddity offends me, but apparently it's idiomatic. I just ported all my use of beginControlFlow for switch to addCode. I'm perfectly fine leaving it like that, but figured I'd file and see what others thought.

[kdubb]

Why not add a beginSwitch/endSwitch pair?

Alternatively we can make the control statement explicit in beginControlFlow/endControlFlow.

For example...

codeBlock.beginControlFlow("switch", code);
// generate cases
codeBlock.endControlFlow("switch")

In either case, I'm assuming you probably know your ending a switch when calling endControlFlow and nextControlFlow is irrelevant for switch.

[kdubb]

The second option (adding an explicit control statement name) essentially just pushes the idea of keeping a state stack onto the caller, which seems like a good idea since the calling code is probably structured in that way already,