The Switch Statement

[Mark Salsbery]

Heh no problem. I work alone at home - I don't get to have these water-cooler discussions with colleagues :) Cheers!

Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:

[Jammer 0]

heh ... they can be really beneficial! Although I'm still at a stage in learning .NET where I come away with more questions than answers! Doh!

Jammer My Blog | Article(s)

[carbon_golem]

Not to beat the "dead horse" here, but I didn't see anyone bring up the induced complexity that the switch adds. See complexity definition here.[^] The higher the complexity score, the more trouble maintenance and testing become. The switch is very efficient at adding additional paths in the code (cases - 1). While yes, the readability is there, one could argue at the same time a certain amount of flexibility is lost at the expense. There are more or less feasible ways around using a switch or bank of if/else altogether - using the chain-of-responsibility pattern has worked for me in some situations. And certainly it has made unit testing easier. I might correct your colleague's statement and submit that maybe the architecture isn't "wrong" by using a switch, it just might be pointing out that there are higher quality alternatives. Scott P.

"Simplicity carried to the extreme becomes elegance."
-Jon Franklin

[led mike]

Jammer wrote:

What do other folks think of this?

It's not Object Oriented and the following is a section of my own notes to myself (quotes ) from Kent Becks book "Implementation Patterns"Conditional (page 36)

If/then and switch statements are the simplest form of
instance –specific behavior….

The more paths through a program the less likely the program
is to be correct….The proliferation of conditionals reduces reliability….This
problem is compounded when conditionals are duplicated.

These problems can all be eliminated by converting the
conditional logic to messages, either with subclasses or delegation.

---

Last modified: 5hrs 28mins after originally posted --

led mike

[led mike]

carbon_golem wrote:

there are higher quality alternatives.

Agreed. See my post below, that you just beat to the wire! Damn you! :laugh:

led mike

[realJSOP]

Well, your colleague is a moron, and it sound s like his father should have used a switch on him more often when he was a child.

"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

[realJSOP]

carbon_golem wrote:

it just might be pointing out that there are higher quality alternatives.

You mean like "goto"? LOLOL

"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

[Jammer 0]

Whoa ... it wasn't my colleague that stated this ... he was passing on things he'd read/heard ... it was a light-hearted conversation! He is far from a Moron as well, a very good developer in fact.

Jammer My Blog | Article(s)

[Guffa]

Jammer wrote:

He said that he'd read/heard more than once that if you find yourself using a switch you can more or less be assured that its because you've done something wrong in your architecture elsewhere.

That probably comes from someone who don't know how to use a switch properly... What seems more elegant? This:

int result;
SomeClass.SomeEnum value = SomeClass.GetValue();
if (value == SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option1 || value == SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option2) {
result = 1;
} else if (value == SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option3) {
result = 2;
} else if (value == SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option4 || value == SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option5 || value == SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option6) {
result = 3;
} else {
result = 4;
}

or this:

int result;
switch (SomeClass.GetValue()) {
case SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option1:
case SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option2: result = 1; break;
case SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option3: result = 2; break;
case SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option4:
case SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option5:
case SomeClass.SomeEnum.Option6: result = 3; break;
default: result = 4; break;
}

Besides, the switch solution is faster.

Despite everything, the person most likely to be fooling you next is yourself.

[Guffa]

Actually, if you have more than just a few case labels in a switch (four IIRC), it's implemented using a dictionary.

Despite everything, the person most likely to be fooling you next is yourself.

[Mark Salsbery]

:omg:

Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:

[Colin Angus Mackay]

It depends on the situation. There are definitely situations where I've seen needless use of switch statements, and others that would have benefitted from a switch statement. If you find that you are switching on a specific property of a class a lot within that class then it can be an indication that you might want to refactor the code into a class hierarchy. Each derived class handles a specific case that was in the switch statement.

Recent blog posts: *Method hiding Vs. overriding *Microsoft Surface *SQL Server / Visual Studio install order My Blog

[led mike]

Wow what a mess. Fixed. Thanks

[PIEBALDconsult]

Yeah, more than five, as you showed back in July. I keep forgetting that. On the other hand, using your own Dictionary gives you more flexibility and the ability to use it in multiple places (if you can think of such a use).

[N a v a n e e t h]

As others said, switch statement has many benefits. So use it wisely. You should read something about method cohesion[^].

Navaneeth How to use google | Ask smart questions

[Vengatachalapathy Palanivel]

Switch case is better in performance than if-else-if ladder. While using switch case, compiler optimizes the code for the fastest execution. you can check this Url also: http://www.blackwasp.co.uk/SpeedTestIfElseSwitch.aspx[^]

Regards, Vengat P

[Mark Salsbery]

That was my point[^]

Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:

[Jakob Olsen]

Pete O'Hanlon wrote:

It's like everything else in C# - use it when you have to.

Couldn't agree more. I have heard the "using construct X is really bad design" about more or less every construct in C/C++/C#, but they all have situations where they are just right, so use them where they make sense. (yes... even "goto"...)

ASCII tables, HTML entities, types, string formats and more info for the serious coder at: www.codecharts.com