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?


当前回答

在这种情况下,老式的C程序员使用goto。这是goto的一种用法,实际上是Linux样式指南鼓励的,它被称为集中函数exit:

int foo() {
    int result = /*some error code*/;
    if(!executeStepA()) goto cleanup;
    if(!executeStepB()) goto cleanup;
    if(!executeStepC()) goto cleanup;

    result = 0;
cleanup:
    executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();
    return result;
}

有些人使用goto的方法是将body包装成一个循环并将其断开,但实际上这两种方法做的是同一件事。如果你只在executeStepA()成功时才需要一些其他的清理,那么goto方法会更好:

int foo() {
    int result = /*some error code*/;
    if(!executeStepA()) goto cleanupPart;
    if(!executeStepB()) goto cleanup;
    if(!executeStepC()) goto cleanup;

    result = 0;
cleanup:
    innerCleanup();
cleanupPart:
    executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();
    return result;
}

使用循环方法,在这种情况下,您将得到两级循环。

其他回答

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;
    }
}

以下是我在C-whatever和Java中使用过的一个技巧:

do {
    if (!condition1) break;
    doSomething();
    if (!condition2) break;
    doSomethingElse()
    if (!condition3) break;
    doSomethingAgain();
    if (!condition4) break;
    doYetAnotherThing();
} while(FALSE);  // Or until(TRUE) or whatever your language likes

我更喜欢它而不是嵌套的if,因为它的清晰度,特别是当每个条件都有明确的注释时。

给定函数:

string trySomething ()
{
    if (condition_1)
    {
        do_1();
        ..
            if (condition_k)
            {
                do_K();

                return doSomething();
            }
            else
            {
                return "Error k";
            }
        ..
    }
    else
    {
        return "Error 1";
    }
}

我们可以通过反转验证过程来摆脱语法嵌套:

string trySomething ()
{
    if (!condition_1)
    {
        return "Error 1";
    }

    do_1();

    ..

    if (!condition_k)
    {
        return "Error k";
    }

    do_K();

    return doSomething ();
}

只做

if( executeStepA() && executeStepB() && executeStepC() )
{
    // ...
}
executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();

就是这么简单。


由于三次编辑都从根本上改变了问题(如果算上版本1的修订,则是四次),我包括了我正在回答的代码示例:

bool conditionA = executeStepA();
if (conditionA){
    bool conditionB = executeStepB();
    if (conditionB){
        bool conditionC = executeStepC();
        if (conditionC){
            ...
        }
    }
}

executeThisFunctionInAnyCase();

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。