No need for "break;" after "return ...;"

First, thanks for the ready-to-use and useful patch! Please allow me to defend the current situation:
If later the code will change (no return statement for some reasons), a nasty thing can happen: the case branches will fall to the other branches. These lines of code are very defensive, but my opinion is that it's not an inherently bad thing.

I would like to roll this patch. Although I see what Aron is talking about, a break after a return won't ever be called. Pretty sure :)

After a short reconsideration I committed the patch, it makes the code shorter and cleaner. Thanks again!