Switch boolean.... (reinventing if, unnecessarily)

[kmoorevs]

Thanks for posting! After two weeks without a new thread, I was starting to think that we are all working on perfect code! BTW, the example is perfect for getting your LOC up! :laugh:

"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse

[DJ van Wyk]

Someone needs to sit down with the guy and give him some 'help' to understand decent coding practices. Keep a hammer ready ...

My plan is to live forever ... so far so good

[Sander Rossel]

You aren't working with my previous employer, are you? :laugh:

Visit my blog at Sander's bits - Writing the code you need. Or read my articles at my CodeProject profile.

Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability. — Edsger W. Dijkstra

Regards, Sander

[Freak30]

I see a reason for the function but not for the switch statement. Except if you are paid by lines of code of course. :-D

The good thing about pessimism is, that you are always either right or pleasently surprised.

[Simon ORiordan from UK]

The advantage of a switch is that it bails as soon as a test passes, thus reducing conditional branching. Here you could use an if else.

[ScottM1]

Or take it out altogether as it's setting 2 Booleans.

[Lost User]

In that case it has the same advantage as the "if" would have; but if that is an important 'optimization', then you already have a bigger problem :)

Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)

[mbb01]

The only reason I could think for writing or keeping the code this way would be if enabled became an enumerated type and had more than 2 states.

[Simon ORiordan from UK]

In my experience Microsoft is pretty much immune to optimisation. You can reduce branching by one or two orders of magnitude and the crappy performance just doesn't budge. :zzz:

[Daniel Pfeffer]

In that case - create it as an enumerated type, with two values. You may then expand the enumeration without rewriting the existing code.

If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill

[Lost User]

Probably because it is a micro-optimization; you won't notice much difference if it merely saves you the toggeling of a boolean.

Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)

[Simon ORiordan from UK]

Ha! It was actually an image processing filter mask which used pointer arithmetic. I invented something I called a Summation Threshold Filter which should have been ten times quicker than a Median filter. Let's just say that this was not apparent. :laugh:

[Scott Corbett]

Umm...that's not true. A switch will continue to fall through until you get to a break statement or the end of the switch (i.e. the default case.) On the other hand, if/else statements do bail as soon as the first passing conditional is found and the associated code block is executed.

Scott E. Corbett

[Member 9908362]

FirstControl.Enabled = !FirstControl.Enabled;
SecondControl.Enabled = !SecondControl.Enabled;

[Kirk 10389821]

Code Reviews Code Reviews Code Reviews Here is a great rule. When someone gets multiple "mandatory" changes needing to be made as a result of a Code Review. Then you must review weekly, ALL of their code. This continues until they no longer require "mandatory" changes for a few weeks in a row. The goals are: 1) Slow them down 2) Get them to proactively ask people how they should code/name something 3) Show them the right way (for your group) to do things Our Code Reviews have 3 Comment Levels: - Mandatory: We will not let this stand in production, must be rewritten - Suggested: We are not thrilled, but if you can "really" defend it. - Noted: We are just making a note, take it or leave it (Variable names, Variable comments) Make Code Reviews fun. Friday starting at lunch time with pizza brought in. It helps you to detach from the depth of coding for the weekend. Besides, Code Reviews are how Good Developers help new Developers!

[Jeremy Falcon]

Totally agree.

Jeremy Falcon

[Richard Deeming]

Scott Corbett wrote:

A switch will continue to fall through until you get to a break statement or the end of the switch (i.e. the default case.)

Not in C# - every case is required to have a terminating statement (break, goto, return or throw).

switch (C# Reference)[^]:

Unlike C++, C# does not allow execution to continue from one switch section to the next. ... C# requires the end of switch sections, including the final one, to be unreachable. That is, unlike some other languages, your code may not fall through into the next switch section.

---

"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer

[Basketcase Software]

Couldn't resist:

void EnableFromValue(bool enabled)
{
FirstControl.Enabled = enabled;
SecondControl.Enabled = enabled;
...
}

[ttennebb]

I believe a switch is just a calculated jump statement. It doesn't work it's way through all the previous possibilities. Yes. Once calculated, the program goes to the break statement then jumps out appropriately. Switch statements are quite fast. In this case, I don't see advantage either way as an if statement is very simple too.

[Javier jimenez Rico]

it is simple : void EnableFromValue(bool ?enabled) { FirstControl.Enabled=enabled.HasValue?enabled.Value:false; SecondControl.Enabled=enabled.HasValue?enabled.Value:false; }