| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
FJMSoft
Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Posts: 36
|
| Switch |
 Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:01 pm |
 |
|
Hello.
I need to make a switch which in several cases I will have a common procedure (which is also a case) to do and dont want to copy in every case (to use less memory).
How can I do this?
Can I use a goto inside a switch?
| Code: | switch (MODE) {
case 1:
//code
goto common;
break;
case 2:
//code
goto common;
break;
case 3:
common://code
break;
|
Also, as above, can I put the break inside an IF?
| Code: | case 3:
common: if (x=1) break;
//code
break;
|
Sorry for such donkey questions, I'm learning. The help dont have such information.
Thank you. |
|
 |
E_Blue
Joined: 13 Apr 2011
Posts: 417
|
| Switch |
| Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:29 pm |
|
|
You can put the case this way
| Code: |
switch (MODE) {
case 1:
case 3:
case 5:
//code
goto common;
break;
case 2:
case 4:
case 6:
//code
goto common2;
break;
} |
I don't like to use goto's, I consider that as dirty code
Why no create a sub routine called Common() and call it?
Plus if you use goto's you don't need a break after since the code never come back to execute the break.
Part two
Break are used to get out of loops so if you use a break inside of an IF that is inside of a loop, like SWITCH, yes, its OK but it will ignore the rest of the code after it until the en of the SWITCH structure.
_________________
Electric Blue |
|
|
FJMSoft
Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Posts: 36
|
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:43 pm |
|
|
Thanks for the answer E_Blue.
Actually, I have made a code like this but it is failing and I cant find the error.
I think is something about the goto.
E_Blue, can I put the label (common in this case) inside another case as shown?
My code is like:
| Code: | Case 1:
//code
goto common
Case 5:
common: If (x==7) break;
//code <- it is doing this code even when x=7
break; |
I think a routine would be ok.
But, can I break the switch inside it?
Thank you again. |
|
|
gpsmikey
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 588
Location: Kirkland, WA
|
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 3:23 pm |
|
|
One note - it may have just been a typo on your part, but you had the statement "if (x=1) then" -- that will ALWAYS be true (and will set "x" equal to 1). The correct syntax is "if (x == 1) then" - what works even better to protect yourself (and myself) from that common mistake is to write it reversed - if you write it as " if ( 1=x) then" the compiler will kick it out as an error so you will see it and realize you meant "if (1 == x) then". I have shot myself in the foot a number of times with forgetting the second "=" sign in a conditional test (and the compiler says nothing, leaving you to stare at it for hours trying to figure out what is wrong!!)
mikey
_________________
mikey
-- you can't have too many gadgets or too much disk space !
old engineering saying: 1+1 = 3 for sufficiently large values of 1 or small values of 3 |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in
