A curious case

[Peter Haworth]

Yes, I know that's possible.  But it can't do:

switch temp
	case < 4
		break
	case > 10
		break
end switch

Pete Haworth

On Mar 2, 2011, at 4:33 PM, DunbarX at aol.com wrote:

> No, I think it can resolve any LC statement, no?
> 
> 
> put 3 into temp
> switch
> case temp < 4
> put "lessThan"
> break
> case temp = 11
> put "never see this"
> break
> end switch
> 
> 
> Craig Newman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Haworth <pete at mollysrevenge.com>
> To: How to use LiveCode <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com>
> Sent: Wed, Mar 2, 2011 6:19 pm
> Subject: Re: A curious case
> 
> 
> Switch is definitley very handy but I wish it was more flexible.  As far as I 
> can tell, the case statement can only test for equality, for example:
> 
> switch myvar
>    case begins with "xyz"
> 
> ... generates an error as does anything else other than just a straight value on 
> the case line.
> 
> I know you can do
> 
> switch
>    case myVar begins with "xyz"
> 
> ...just seems like conditions other than = would be more elegant on the case 
> line.
> 
> Pete Haworth
> 
> On Mar 2, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
> 
>> I think the switch control structure is pretty handy for this. If you put all 
> the conditions that will not require a break at the top, then the program will 
> flow down through your conditions and only execute the code inside your case 
> statements if the conditions are true. Towards the end of the switch statement 
> put the conditions that will break when met (if any). It reads much cleaner. 
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 2, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Peter Brigham MD wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mar 2, 2011, at 11:26 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Andre Garzia wrote:
>>>>> I tend to  work on the same way. longer forms makes shorter understanding
>>>>> time. I'd rather write more and understand more than write faster and then
>>>>> one week from now, be completely lost in nested mazes
>>>> 
>>>> Well said.
>>>> 
>>>> And sometimes lengthy deeply-nested IFs are good candidates for a switch 
> block.
>>>> 
>>>> I once stumbled across two tips about code style that have been very 
> helpful:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. If a given function has nested IFs more than three levels deep, it may be 
> a good candidate for breaking it up into smaller functions.
>>>> 
>>>> 2. If a function is longer than can be viewed in one screen, it may be a 
> good candidate for breaking it up into smaller functions.
>>>> 
>>>> Sometimes those can't be applied for sound practical reasons, but where they 
> can oh boy does it make code more readable.
>>> 
>>> I grapple with this all the time. My status with LC is "dedicated amateur," 
> so I may not use the best practices, but.... One other consideration is breaking 
> out a chunk of code when it needs to be reusable, but this is not without 
> problems too.
>> <snip>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>