Talk:Control Structures

Ok, old version no longer needed. A couple cleanup requests:

• add return
• change looping to flow control OR add a separate section for continue, break & return
• the above 3 should each have a lv3 heading

--StDoodle (#1059825) 18:57, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Never mind; the stuff, I fixed it. --StDoodle (#1059825) 19:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC) (Though further info for break, continue & return might be nice).

I was not aware of that use of switch statements, thanks! --StDoodle (#1059825) 13:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

• That use of switch statements was one of the things zarqon and I pushed for when we were cajoling veracity to add it as a mafia feature. It is so much more readable to use a single switch statement than 6 "else if" statements. --Bale 23:33, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Er, that is to say, I knew how to use them with a top-level variable, but not that you could omit that and use a sep. expression each time... and I could swear I tried to use expressions that way (apparently you can't do both at once!). :P --StDoodle (#1059825) 02:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm wondering if a more explicit example is necessary. What I'm talking about is:

switch {
case x < 0 && x == x % 2:
   print(x+" is negative and even");
   break;
case x < 0:
   print(x+" is negative and odd");
   break;
case x == 0:
   print("x is zero");
   break;
case x == x % 2 && x < 10:
   print(x+" is a positive one digit even number");
   break;
case x != x % 2
   print(x+" is an odd number");
   break;
default:
   print(x+" is greater than 9");
}

Do you think an example like that would be helpful? --Bale 03:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

That looks good; I'd add in one line with a different variable though, just to make the differentiation in use clear. Such as an initial check for y > 9000 or something. Then again, I pretty much figured it out from what's on the page, so I'm not sure it's necessary. Perhaps three samples are in order: a simple switch with a generic variable to test, your example, and a "This won't work" example that tries to mix the two. --StDoodle (#1059825) 13:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Regarding foreach and sorting: since it sorts by index, not by value, that should be mentioned somewhere in that blurb. --Heeheehee 12:10, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

• foreach DOES NOT SORT - it uses whatever ordering is provided by the aggregate you're iterating over. For maps and arrays, the objects themselves maintain the keys in sorted order. For plural typed constants, the ordering is however the elements were originally listed, which is completely arbitrary (and can even include duplicate keys).