How can I compare strings in C using a `switch` statement?
In C there is a switch
construct which enables one to execute different conditional branches of code based on an test integer value, e.g.,
int a;
/* Read the value of "a" from some source, e.g. user input */
switch (a) {
case 100:
// Code
break;
case 200:
// Code
break;
default:
// Code
break;
}
How is it possible to obtain the same behavior (i.e. avoid the so-called "if
-else
ladder") for a string value, i.e., a char *
?
Solution 1:
If you mean, how to write something similar to this:
// switch statement
switch (string) {
case "B1":
// do something
break;
/* more case "xxx" parts */
}
Then the canonical solution in C is to use an if-else ladder:
if (strcmp(string, "B1") == 0)
{
// do something
}
else if (strcmp(string, "xxx") == 0)
{
// do something else
}
/* more else if clauses */
else /* default: */
{
}
Solution 2:
If you have many cases and do not want to write a ton of strcmp()
calls, you could do something like:
switch(my_hash_function(the_string)) {
case HASH_B1: ...
/* ...etc... */
}
You just have to make sure your hash function has no collisions inside the set of possible values for the string.
Solution 3:
There is no way to do this in C. There are a lot of different approaches. Typically the simplest is to define a set of constants that represent your strings and do a look up by string on to get the constant:
#define BADKEY -1
#define A1 1
#define A2 2
#define B1 3
#define B2 4
typedef struct { char *key; int val; } t_symstruct;
static t_symstruct lookuptable[] = {
{ "A1", A1 }, { "A2", A2 }, { "B1", B1 }, { "B2", B2 }
};
#define NKEYS (sizeof(lookuptable)/sizeof(t_symstruct))
int keyfromstring(char *key)
{
int i;
for (i=0; i < NKEYS; i++) {
t_symstruct *sym = lookuptable[i];
if (strcmp(sym->key, key) == 0)
return sym->val;
}
return BADKEY;
}
/* ... */
switch (keyfromstring(somestring)) {
case A1: /* ... */ break;
case A2: /* ... */ break;
case B1: /* ... */ break;
case B2: /* ... */ break;
case BADKEY: /* handle failed lookup */
}
There are, of course, more efficient ways to do this. If you keep your keys sorted, you can use a binary search. You could use a hashtable too. These things change your performance at the expense of maintenance.