Swift switch statement considered all cases of Int, but compiler still display error
Update for Swift 3: Swift 3 introduced ClosedRange
which makes
it possible to define a range like 1...Int.max
including the
largest possible integer (compare Ranges in Swift 3). So this compiles and works as expected,
but still requires a default case to satisfy the compiler:
extension Int {
enum Kind {
case negative, zero, positive
}
var kind: Kind {
switch self {
case 0:
return .zero
case 1...Int.max:
return .positive
case Int.min...(-1):
return .negative
default:
fatalError("Oops, this should not happen")
}
}
}
There are other bug reports where the Swift compiler does not
correctly determine the exhaustiveness of switch-statements, such
as https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-766, where Apple engineer Joe Groff
commented:
Unfortunately, integer operations like '...' and '<' are just plain functions to Swift, so it'd be difficult to do this kind of analysis. Even with special case understanding of integer intervals, I think there are still cases in the full generality of pattern matching for which exhaustiveness matching would be undecidable. We may eventually be able to handle some cases, but there will always be special cases involved in doing so.
Old answer: The compiler is not so smart to recognize that you have covered
all possible cases. One possible solution is to add a default
case with a fatalError()
:
var kind: Kind {
switch self {
case 0:
return .Zero
case let x where x > 0:
return .Positive
case let x where x < 0:
return .Negative
default:
fatalError("Oops, this should not happen")
}
}
Or make case 0:
the default case:
var kind: Kind {
switch self {
case let x where x > 0:
return .Positive
case let x where x < 0:
return .Negative
default:
return .Zero
}
}
(Remark: I initially thought that the following would work correctly
without needed a default case:
var kind: Kind {
switch self {
case 0:
return .Zero
case 1 ... Int.max:
return .Positive
case Int.min ... -1:
return .Negative
}
}
However, this compiles, but aborts at runtime because you cannot
create the range 1 ... Int.max
. More information around this
problem can be found in the article Ranges and Intervals in Swift.)
Exhaustive condition of switch case in Swift
Swift only truly verifies that a switch
block is exhaustive when working with enum
types. Even a switching on Bool
requires a default
block in addition to true
and false
:
var b = true
switch b {
case true: println("true")
case false: println("false")
}
// error: switch must be exhaustive, consider adding a default clause
With an enum
, however, the compiler is happy to only look at the two cases:
enum MyBool {
case True
case False
}
var b = MyBool.True
switch b {
case .True: println("true")
case .False: println("false")
}
If you need to include a default
block for the compiler's sake but don't have anything for it to do, the break
keyword comes in handy:
var b = true
switch b {
case true: println("true")
case false: println("false")
default: break
}
Switch on Any.Type
Xcode generates the following warning on the above case: "Cast from 'Any.Type' to unrelated Type 'Int' always fails" which hints at the correct way:
let t: Any.Type = Int.self
switch t {
case is Int.Type:
print("Int")
default:
print("Other")
}
Can a swift switch be exhaustive for type Double without a default case?
No because only enum types can be exhaustively checked.
But in this case, the problem is even deeper. Even if Integers could be exhaustively checked, you still couldn't exhaustively check Double without a where
clause. One of the options is .nan
("not a number"), which you're not considering. So you might think to just add that case:
case .nan:
yAxisMinimum = .nan
Not only won't this make it exhaustive, it won't even work the way you'd expect.
var minY = Double.nan
switch minY {
case -(Double.infinity)..<0.9:
yAxisMinimum = 0.0
// ...
case .nan:
yAxisMinimum = .nan
default:
yAxisMinimum = 0
}
yAxisMinimum // 0
Why? Because of this:
var minY = Double.nan
minY == .nan // false
NaN is unequal to everything, including NaN. So there's no way to include it directly in a switch statement. You have to use a where
clause:
case _ where minY.isNaN:
yAxisMinimum = .nan
And that's definitely beyond the compiler's ability to validate.
Expected declaration on switch declaration
You can't write switch rank {
inside the struct directly , it should be inside a function init
or any other custom one
public struct beltRank {
var rank = 0
var belt = ""
init(rank:Int) {
// write switch here
}
}
Related Topics
How to Demonstrate a Zombie Object in Swift
Swift: Double Conversion Inconsistency. How to Correctly Compare Doubles
Converting Swift 2.3 to Swift 3.0 - Error, Cannot Invoke 'Datatask' with an Argument List of Type'
Swift Switch Statement Considered All Cases of Int, But Compiler Still Display Error
Subtle Cast Warning When Using SQLite.Swift ... Binding? to Any
How to Query Nested Data in Firebase Database
Swift 3 - Uibutton Adding Settitle from Plist and Database
Swift Test Give Error "Undefined Symbols for Architecture X86_64"
Fill Circle with Wave Animation in Swiftui
How to Compare Just the Time of a Date in Swift
Why Does Int(Float(Int.Max)) Give Me an Error
Array as a Dictionary Value in Swift Language
Nstimer.Scheduledtimerwithtimeinterval in Swift Playground
How to Update a Value in a Nested Dictionary Given Path Fragment in Swift
Calling a Function Defined in Assembly from Swift
No Value Associated with Key Codingkeys While Trying to Get Data from Github API in Xcode App