Does Case-Switch Work Like This

Does case-switch work like this?

This is called case fall-through, and is a desirable behavior. It allows you to share code between cases.

An example of how to use case fall-through behavior:

switch(blah)
{
case a:
function1();
case b:
function2();
case c:
function3();
break;
default:
break;
}

If you enter the switch when blah == a, then you will execute function1(), function2(), and function3().

If you don't want to have this behavior, you can opt out of it by including break statements.

switch(blah)
{
case a:
function1();
break;
case b:
function2();
break;
case c:
function3();
break;
default:
break;
}

The way a switch statement works is that it will (more or less) execute a goto to jump to your case label, and keep running from that point. When the execution hits a break, it leaves the switch block.

How Switch case Statement Implemented or works internally?

It's actually up to the compiler how a switch statement is realized in code.

However, my understanding is that when it's suitable (that is, relatively dense cases), a jump table is used.

That would mean that something like:

switch(i) {
case 0: doZero(); break;
case 1: doOne();
case 2: doTwo(); break;
default: doDefault();
}

Would end up getting compiled to something like (horrible pseudo-assembler, but it should be clear, I hope).

load i into REG
compare REG to 2
if greater, jmp to DEFAULT
compare REG to 0
if less jmp to DEFAULT
jmp to table[REG]
data table
ZERO
ONE
TWO
end data
ZERO: call doZero
jmp END
ONE: call doOne
TWO: call doTwo
jmp END
DEFAULT: call doDefault
END:

If that's not the case, there are other possible implementations that allow for some extent of "better than a a sequence of conditionals".

Using two values for one switch case statement

You can use have both CASE statements as follows.

  case text1: 
case text4:{
//blah
break;
}

SEE THIS EXAMPLE:The code example calculates the number of days in a particular month:

class SwitchDemo {
public static void main(String[] args) {

int month = 2;
int year = 2000;
int numDays = 0;

switch (month) {
case 1:
case 3:
case 5:
case 7:
case 8:
case 10:
case 12:
numDays = 31;
break;
case 4:
case 6:
case 9:
case 11:
numDays = 30;
break;
case 2:
if (((year % 4 == 0) &&
!(year % 100 == 0))
|| (year % 400 == 0))
numDays = 29;
else
numDays = 28;
break;
default:
System.out.println("Invalid month.");
break;
}
System.out.println("Number of Days = "
+ numDays);
}
}

This is the output from the code:

Number of Days = 29

FALLTHROUGH:

Another point of interest is the break statement. Each break statement
terminates the enclosing switch statement. Control flow continues with
the first statement following the switch block. The break statements
are necessary because without them, statements in switch blocks fall
through
: All statements after the matching case label are executed in
sequence, regardless of the expression of subsequent case labels,
until a break statement is encountered.

EXAMPLE CODE:

public class SwitchFallThrough {

public static void main(String[] args) {
java.util.ArrayList<String> futureMonths =
new java.util.ArrayList<String>();

int month = 8;

switch (month) {
case 1: futureMonths.add("January");
case 2: futureMonths.add("February");
case 3: futureMonths.add("March");
case 4: futureMonths.add("April");
case 5: futureMonths.add("May");
case 6: futureMonths.add("June");
case 7: futureMonths.add("July");
case 8: futureMonths.add("August");
case 9: futureMonths.add("September");
case 10: futureMonths.add("October");
case 11: futureMonths.add("November");
case 12: futureMonths.add("December");
default: break;
}

if (futureMonths.isEmpty()) {
System.out.println("Invalid month number");
} else {
for (String monthName : futureMonths) {
System.out.println(monthName);
}
}
}
}

This is the output from the code:

August
September
October
November
December

Using Strings in switch Statements

In Java SE 7 and later, you can use a String object in the switch
statement's expression. The following code example, ,
displays the number of the month based on the value of the String
named month:

public class StringSwitchDemo {

public static int getMonthNumber(String month) {

int monthNumber = 0;

if (month == null) {
return monthNumber;
}

switch (month.toLowerCase()) {
case "january":
monthNumber = 1;
break;
case "february":
monthNumber = 2;
break;
case "march":
monthNumber = 3;
break;
case "april":
monthNumber = 4;
break;
case "may":
monthNumber = 5;
break;
case "june":
monthNumber = 6;
break;
case "july":
monthNumber = 7;
break;
case "august":
monthNumber = 8;
break;
case "september":
monthNumber = 9;
break;
case "october":
monthNumber = 10;
break;
case "november":
monthNumber = 11;
break;
case "december":
monthNumber = 12;
break;
default:
monthNumber = 0;
break;
}

return monthNumber;
}

public static void main(String[] args) {

String month = "August";

int returnedMonthNumber =
StringSwitchDemo.getMonthNumber(month);

if (returnedMonthNumber == 0) {
System.out.println("Invalid month");
} else {
System.out.println(returnedMonthNumber);
}
}
}

The output from this code is 8.

FROM Java Docs

OR operator in switch-case?

What are the backgrounds for a switch-case to not accept this operator?

Because case requires constant expression as its value. And since an || expression is not a compile time constant, it is not allowed.

From JLS Section 14.11:

Switch label should have following syntax:

SwitchLabel:

case ConstantExpression :

case EnumConstantName :

default :



Under the hood:

The reason behind allowing just constant expression with cases can be understood from the JVM Spec Section 3.10 - Compiling Switches:

Compilation of switch statements uses the tableswitch and lookupswitch instructions. The tableswitch instruction is used when the cases of the switch can be efficiently represented as indices into a table of target offsets. The default target of the switch is used if the value of the expression of the switch falls outside the range of valid indices.

So, for the cases label to be used by tableswitch as a index into the table of target offsets, the value of the case should be known at compile time. That is only possible if the case value is a constant expression. And || expression will be evaluated at runtime, and the value will only be available at that time.

From the same JVM section, the following switch-case:

switch (i) {
case 0: return 0;
case 1: return 1;
case 2: return 2;
default: return -1;
}

is compiled to:

0   iload_1             // Push local variable 1 (argument i)
1 tableswitch 0 to 2: // Valid indices are 0 through 2 (NOTICE This instruction?)
0: 28 // If i is 0, continue at 28
1: 30 // If i is 1, continue at 30
2: 32 // If i is 2, continue at 32
default:34 // Otherwise, continue at 34
28 iconst_0 // i was 0; push int constant 0...
29 ireturn // ...and return it
30 iconst_1 // i was 1; push int constant 1...
31 ireturn // ...and return it
32 iconst_2 // i was 2; push int constant 2...
33 ireturn // ...and return it
34 iconst_m1 // otherwise push int constant -1...
35 ireturn // ...and return it

So, if the case value is not a constant expressions, compiler won't be able to index it into the table of instruction pointers, using tableswitch instruction.

Is else if faster than switch() case?

For just a few items, the difference is small. If you have many items you should definitely use a switch.

If a switch contains more than five items, it's implemented using a lookup table or a hash list. This means that all items get the same access time, compared to a list of if:s where the last item takes much more time to reach as it has to evaluate every previous condition first.

When to use a switch statement in Java

Well, switch feels "lighter" in many cases than an if/else if ladder, in my opinion. Basically you don't have that much syntax with braces and parentheses in the way of your code. That being said, switch inherits C's syntax. That means you have break and only a single scope for variables unless you introduce new blocks.

Still, the compiler is able to optimize switch statements into a lookup table and perform compile-time checking for literals when dealing with enumerations. So, I'd suggest that it's usually preferable to use switch over if/else if if you're dealing with numeric or enum types.

In a switch statement, why are all the cases being executed?

It's a bug in your code. You forgot to put in a break after each case:

switch (day % 10) {
case 1: ordinalBuilder.append("st"); break;
case 2: ordinalBuilder.append("nd"); break;
case 3: ordinalBuilder.append("rd"); break;
default: ordinalBuilder.append("th"); break;
}

Java switch statement multiple cases

Sadly, it's not possible in Java. You'll have to resort to using if-else statements.

Switch statement for greater-than/less-than

When I looked at the solutions in the other answers I saw some things that I know are bad for performance. I was going to put them in a comment but I thought it was better to benchmark it and share the results. You can test it yourself. Below are my results (ymmv) normalized after the fastest operation in each browser.

Here is the results from 2021-MAY-05

































































































TestChromeFirefoxOperaEdgeBraveNode
1.0 time15 ms14 ms17 ms17 ms16 ms14 ms
if-immediate1.001.001.001.001.001.00
if-indirect2.201.212.062.182.191.93
switch-immediate2.071.431.711.712.191.93
switch-range3.602.002.472.652.882.86
switch-range22.071.361.821.711.941.79
switch-indirect-array2.931.572.532.472.752.50
array-linear-switch2.733.292.122.122.382.50
array-binary-switch5.806.075.245.245.445.37

Expression inside switch case statement

amount is a number, but the expressions in the case clauses only evaluate to booleans; the values will never match.

You could always do

switch (true) {
case (amount >= 7500 && amount < 10000):
// Code
break;
case (amount >= 10000 && amount < 15000):
// Code
break;
// etc.
}

It works because the value being matched is now the boolean true, so the code under the first case clause with an expression that evaluates to true will be executed.

It’s kinda “tricky”, I guess, but I see nothing wrong with using it. A simple ifelse statement would probably be more concise, and you’d not have to worry about accidental fall-through. But there it is anyway.



Related Topics



Leave a reply



Submit