假设我有这样的伪代码:
bool conditionA = executeStepA();
if (conditionA){
bool conditionB = executeStepB();
if (conditionB){
bool conditionC = executeStepC();
if (conditionC){
...
}
}
}
executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();
函数executeStepX当且仅当前一个成功时执行。
在任何情况下,executeThisFunctionInAnyCase函数都应该在最后被调用。
我在编程方面是一个新手,所以很抱歉提出一个非常基本的问题:有没有一种方法(例如在C/ c++中)以代码易读性为代价,避免长if链产生那种“金字塔式代码”?
我知道如果我们可以跳过executeThisFunctionInAnyCase函数调用,代码可以简化为:
bool conditionA = executeStepA();
if (!conditionA) return;
bool conditionB = executeStepB();
if (!conditionB) return;
bool conditionC = executeStepC();
if (!conditionC) return;
但是约束是executeThisFunctionInAnyCase函数调用。
break语句可以以某种方式使用吗?
As @Jefffrey said, you can use the conditional short-circuit feature in almost every language, I personally dislike conditional statements with more than 2 condition (more than a single && or ||), just a matter of style. This code does the same (and probably would compile the same) and it looks a bit cleaner to me. You don't need curly braces, breaks, returns, functions, lambdas (only c++11), objects, etc. as long as every function in executeStepX() returns a value that can be cast to true if the next statement is to be executed or false otherwise.
if (executeStepA())
if (executeStepB())
if (executeStepC())
//...
if (executeStepN()); // <-- note the ';'
executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();
任何时候,任何函数返回false,都不会调用下一个函数。
我喜欢@Mayerz的答案,因为你可以在运行时改变要调用的函数(以及它们的顺序)。这有点像观察者模式,其中有一组订阅者(函数、对象等),只要满足给定的任意条件,就会调用和执行这些订阅者。在许多情况下,这可能是一个过度杀戮,所以明智地使用它:)
因为你也有……代码块…]在执行之间,我猜你有内存分配或对象初始化。通过这种方式,你必须关心在退出时你已经初始化的所有东西,如果你遇到问题,任何函数都会返回false,也要清理它。
在这种情况下,根据我的经验(当我使用CryptoAPI时),最好的方法是创建小类,在构造函数中初始化数据,在析构函数中反初始化数据。下一个函数类必须是前一个函数类的子类。如果出错-抛出异常。
class CondA
{
public:
CondA() {
if (!executeStepA())
throw int(1);
[Initialize data]
}
~CondA() {
[Clean data]
}
A* _a;
};
class CondB : public CondA
{
public:
CondB() {
if (!executeStepB())
throw int(2);
[Initialize data]
}
~CondB() {
[Clean data]
}
B* _b;
};
class CondC : public CondB
{
public:
CondC() {
if (!executeStepC())
throw int(3);
[Initialize data]
}
~CondC() {
[Clean data]
}
C* _c;
};
然后在你的代码中你只需要调用:
shared_ptr<CondC> C(nullptr);
try{
C = make_shared<CondC>();
}
catch(int& e)
{
//do something
}
if (C != nullptr)
{
C->a;//work with
C->b;//work with
C->c;//work with
}
executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();
我想这是最好的解决方案,如果每次调用ConditionX初始化一些东西,分配内存等。最好确保所有东西都被清理干净。
正如Rommik提到的,您可以为此应用设计模式,但我将使用Decorator模式而不是Strategy,因为您想要链式调用。如果代码很简单,那么我会选择一个结构良好的答案来防止嵌套。但是,如果它很复杂或者需要动态链接,那么Decorator模式是一个很好的选择。这是一个yUML类图:
下面是一个示例LinqPad c#程序:
void Main()
{
IOperation step = new StepC();
step = new StepB(step);
step = new StepA(step);
step.Next();
}
public interface IOperation
{
bool Next();
}
public class StepA : IOperation
{
private IOperation _chain;
public StepA(IOperation chain=null)
{
_chain = chain;
}
public bool Next()
{
bool localResult = false;
//do work
//...
// set localResult to success of this work
// just for this example, hard coding to true
localResult = true;
Console.WriteLine("Step A success={0}", localResult);
//then call next in chain and return
return (localResult && _chain != null)
? _chain.Next()
: true;
}
}
public class StepB : IOperation
{
private IOperation _chain;
public StepB(IOperation chain=null)
{
_chain = chain;
}
public bool Next()
{
bool localResult = false;
//do work
//...
// set localResult to success of this work
// just for this example, hard coding to false,
// to show breaking out of the chain
localResult = false;
Console.WriteLine("Step B success={0}", localResult);
//then call next in chain and return
return (localResult && _chain != null)
? _chain.Next()
: true;
}
}
public class StepC : IOperation
{
private IOperation _chain;
public StepC(IOperation chain=null)
{
_chain = chain;
}
public bool Next()
{
bool localResult = false;
//do work
//...
// set localResult to success of this work
// just for this example, hard coding to true
localResult = true;
Console.WriteLine("Step C success={0}", localResult);
//then call next in chain and return
return (localResult && _chain != null)
? _chain.Next()
: true;
}
}
恕我直言,关于设计模式最好的书是《Head First design patterns》。
如果条件被移动到单独的步骤下,条件可以被简化,这是一个c#伪代码,
其思想是使用编排而不是中央编排。
void Main()
{
Request request = new Request();
Response response = null;
// enlist all the processors
var processors = new List<IProcessor>() {new StepA() };
var factory = new ProcessorFactory(processors);
// execute as a choreography rather as a central orchestration.
var processor = factory.Get(request, response);
while (processor != null)
{
processor.Handle(request, out response);
processor = factory.Get(request, response);
}
// final result...
//response
}
public class Request
{
}
public class Response
{
}
public interface IProcessor
{
bool CanProcess(Request request, Response response);
bool Handle(Request request, out Response response);
}
public interface IProcessorFactory
{
IProcessor Get(Request request, Response response);
}
public class ProcessorFactory : IProcessorFactory
{
private readonly IEnumerable<IProcessor> processors;
public ProcessorFactory(IEnumerable<IProcessor> processors)
{
this.processors = processors;
}
public IProcessor Get(Request request, Response response)
{
// this is an iterator
var matchingProcessors = processors.Where(x => x.CanProcess(request, response)).ToArray();
if (!matchingProcessors.Any())
{
return null;
}
return matchingProcessors[0];
}
}
// Individual request processors, you will have many of these...
public class StepA: IProcessor
{
public bool CanProcess(Request request, Response response)
{
// Validate wether this can be processed -- if condition here
return false;
}
public bool Handle(Request request, out Response response)
{
response = null;
return false;
}
}