Don't. Sometimes you need the complexity. The trick is how you do it. Having the "what you do when the condition exists" may take up some room, making the if statement tree appear larger than it really is. So instead of doing things if a condition is set, just set a variable to a specific value for that case( enumeration or number, like 10,014. After the if tree, then have a case statement, and for that specific value, do whatever you would have done in the if tree. It will lighten up the tree. if x1 if x2 if x3 Var1:=100016; endif endif end if case var=100016 do case 100016 things...

你可以把所有的if条件，按照你想要的格式放在它们自己的函数中，返回执行executeThisFunctionInAnyCase()函数。

从OP中的基本示例来看，条件测试和执行可以这样分离;

void InitialSteps()
{
  bool conditionA = executeStepA();
  if (!conditionA)
    return;
  bool conditionB = executeStepB();
  if (!conditionB)
    return;
  bool conditionC = executeStepC();
  if (!conditionC)
    return;
}

然后被这样称呼;

InitialSteps();
executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();

如果c++ 11 lambda是可用的(OP中没有c++ 11标记，但它们可能仍然是一个选项)，那么我们可以放弃单独的函数，并将其包装为lambda。

// Capture by reference (variable access may be required)
auto initialSteps = [&]() {
  // any additional code
  bool conditionA = executeStepA();
  if (!conditionA)
    return;
  // any additional code
  bool conditionB = executeStepB();
  if (!conditionB)
    return;
  // any additional code
  bool conditionC = executeStepC();
  if (!conditionC)
    return;
};

initialSteps();
executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();

break语句可以以某种方式使用吗?

也许不是最好的解决办法，但你可以把你的陈述变成一种方式。While(0)循环并使用break语句而不是return。

让执行函数在失败时抛出异常，而不是返回false。然后你的调用代码看起来像这样:

try {
    executeStepA();
    executeStepB();
    executeStepC();
}
catch (...)

当然，我假设在您最初的示例中，执行步骤只会在步骤内发生错误的情况下返回false ?

为什么使用OOP?在伪代码:

abstract class Abstraction():
   function executeStepA(){...};
   function executeStepB(){...};   
   function executeStepC(){...};
   function executeThisFunctionInAnyCase(){....}
   abstract function execute():

class A(Abstraction){
   function execute(){
      executeStepA();
      executeStepB();
      executeStepC();
   }
}
 class B(Abstraction){
   function execute(){
      executeStepA();
      executeStepB();
   }
}
class C(Abstraction){
     function execute(){
       executeStepA();
     }
}

这样你的如果就消失了

item.execute();
item.executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();

通常，使用OOP可以避免if。

把有条件的东西移到else中怎么样?

if (!(conditionA = executeStepA()){}
else if (!(conditionB = executeStepB()){}
else if (!(conditionC = executeStepC()){}
else if (!(conditionD = executeStepD()){}

这确实解决了缩进问题。