OpenEuphoria

Re: switch statement

• Posted by jeremy (admin) Mar 25, 2009
• 1373 views

I think the answer is we already have a construct (not as nice in some cases as select) that does non-fallthrough, that is the if statement. We did not have a construct that did fall through. Here is another example, built off your example of y, n, q:

sequence answer = prompt_string("Continue (y/n/q)?") 
 
switch answer do 
  case "y": 
  case "Y": 
  case "yes": 
  case "Yes": 
  case "YES": 
    puts(1, "Ok, we will continue\n") 
    break 
 
  case "n": 
  case "N": 
  case "no": 
  case "No": 
  case "NO": 
    puts(1, "Ok, we will not continue\n") 
    break 
 
  case else 
    puts(1, "Ok, we are quitting\n") 
end switch 

Now, there are certainly better way's of doing that example (if upper(answer[1]) = 'Y'), but it's just another example. You can look at the source code for Euphoria and see all sorts of real life examples of a switch. Now, before I finish this message, let's take my original example:

sequence value = "red"  
 
switch value do  
  case "apple":  
  case "pear":  
  case "orange":  
    puts(1, "It's a fruit!\n")  
    break  
  
  case "yellow":  
  case "blue":  
  case "red":  
    puts(1, "It's a color!\n")  
    break  
  
  case else  
    puts(1, "I have no clue what it is \n")  
end switch  

and let's write it as if we didn't have switch at all, i.e. in Euphoria 3.x

sequence value = "red"  
 
if equal(value, "apple") or equal(value, "pear") or equal(value, "orange") then 
  puts(1, "It's a fruit!\n") 
else if equal(value, "yellow") or equal(value, "blue") or equal(value, "red") then 
  puts(1, "It's a color!\n") 
else 
  puts(1, "I have no clue what it is \n")  
end if 

Now, I suppose you could write it a little more simply:

sequence value = "red" 
 
if find(value, { "apple", "pear", "orange" }) > 0 then 
  puts(1, "It's a fruit!\n") 
else if find(value, { "yellow", "blue", "red" }) > 0 then 
  puts(1, "It's a color!\n") 
else 
  puts(1, "I have no clue what it is\n") 
end if 

but, I would encourage you to benchmark these three examples. Hm, I can't resist, I just did a benchmark, here are the results (I changed the puts to setting a message as not to have all sorts of IO hiding the timing):

C:\Develop>exwc switchifbench.ex 
  bench_switch: 0.063 
bench_if_equal: 0.187 
 bench_if_find: 0.344 

And actually, when doing a switch on integers, it's much much faster. Anyway, here is my benchmark code if you want to run it on your box:

sequence value = "red" 
sequence message 
 
procedure bench_switch() 
	switch value do 
		case "apple": 
		case "pear": 
		case "orange": 
			message = "It's a fruit!" 
			break 
 
		case "yellow": 
		case "blue": 
		case "red": 
			message = "It's a color!" 
			break 
 
		case else 
			message = "I have no clue what it is" 
	end switch 
end procedure 
 
procedure bench_if_equal() 
	if equal(value, "apple") or equal(value, "pear") or equal(value, "orange") then 
		message = "It's a fruit!" 
	elsif equal(value, "yellow") or equal(value, "blue") or equal(value, "red") then 
		message = "It's a color!" 
	else 
		message = "I have no clue what it is" 
	end if 
end procedure 
 
procedure bench_if_find() 
	if find(value, { "apple", "pear", "orange" }) > 0 then 
		message = "It's a fruit!" 
	elsif find(value, { "yellow", "blue", "red" }) > 0 then 
		message = "It's a color!" 
	else 
		message = "I have no clue what it is" 
	end if 
end procedure 
 
constant ITS=1000000 
atom t1 
t1  = time() 
for i = 1 to ITS do 
	bench_switch() 
end for 
printf(1, "  bench_switch: %.3f\n", { time() - t1 }) 
 
t1  = time() 
for i = 1 to ITS do 
	bench_if_equal() 
end for 
printf(1, "bench_if_equal: %.3f\n", { time() - t1 }) 
 
t1  = time() 
for i = 1 to ITS do 
	bench_if_find() 
end for 
printf(1, " bench_if_find: %.3f\n", { time() - t1 }) 

Jeremy