当代码流是这样的:
if(check())
{
...
...
if(check())
{
...
...
if(check())
{
...
...
}
}
}
我通常看到这种方法可以避免上述混乱的代码流:
do {
if(!check()) break;
...
...
if(!check()) break;
...
...
if(!check()) break;
...
...
} while(0);
有什么更好的方法可以避免这种工作/黑客，从而使其成为更高级别(行业级别)的代码?
任何跳出盒子的建议都是欢迎的!
当前回答
I'm adding an answer for the sake of completeness. A number of other answers pointed out that the large condition block could be split out into a separate function. But as was also pointed out a number of times is that this approach separates the conditional code from the original context. This is one reason that lambdas were added to the language in C++11. Using lambdas was suggested by others but no explicit sample was provided. I've put one in this answer. What strikes me is that it feels very similar to the do { } while(0) approach in many ways - and maybe that means it's still a goto in disguise....
earlier operations
...
[&]()->void {
if (!check()) return;
...
...
if (!check()) return;
...
...
if (!check()) return;
...
...
}();
later operations
其他回答
对我来说，当(0)是好的时候做{…}。如果您不想看到do{…}while(0)，您可以为它们定义替代关键字。
例子:
SomeUtilities.hpp:
#define BEGIN_TEST do{
#define END_TEST }while(0);
SomeSourceFile.cpp:
BEGIN_TEST
if(!condition1) break;
if(!condition2) break;
if(!condition3) break;
if(!condition4) break;
if(!condition5) break;
//processing code here
END_TEST
我认为编译器将在二进制版本的do{…}while(0)中删除不必要的while(0)条件，并将断点转换为无条件跳转。您可以检查它的汇编语言版本来确定。
使用goto还可以生成更简洁的代码，并且使用条件-然后跳转的逻辑非常简单。您可以执行以下操作:
{
if(!condition1) goto end_blahblah;
if(!condition2) goto end_blahblah;
if(!condition3) goto end_blahblah;
if(!condition4) goto end_blahblah;
if(!condition5) goto end_blahblah;
//processing code here
}end_blah_blah:; //use appropriate label here to describe...
// ...the whole code inside the block.
注意标签放在结束}之后。这是避免一个可能的问题，在goto中，不小心将代码放在中间，因为你没有看到标签。现在就像do{…}while(0)没有条件代码。
为了让代码更清晰，更容易理解，你可以这样做:
SomeUtilities.hpp:
#define BEGIN_TEST {
#define END_TEST(_test_label_) }_test_label_:;
#define FAILED(_test_label_) goto _test_label_
SomeSourceFile.cpp:
BEGIN_TEST
if(!condition1) FAILED(NormalizeData);
if(!condition2) FAILED(NormalizeData);
if(!condition3) FAILED(NormalizeData);
if(!condition4) FAILED(NormalizeData);
if(!condition5) FAILED(NormalizeData);
END_TEST(NormalizeData)
有了这个，你可以做嵌套块，并指定你想要退出/跳出的位置。
BEGIN_TEST
if(!condition1) FAILED(NormalizeData);
if(!condition2) FAILED(NormalizeData);
BEGIN_TEST
if(!conditionAA) FAILED(DecryptBlah);
if(!conditionBB) FAILED(NormalizeData); //Jump out to the outmost block
if(!conditionCC) FAILED(DecryptBlah);
// --We can now decrypt and do other stuffs.
END_TEST(DecryptBlah)
if(!condition3) FAILED(NormalizeData);
if(!condition4) FAILED(NormalizeData);
// --other code here
BEGIN_TEST
if(!conditionA) FAILED(TrimSpaces);
if(!conditionB) FAILED(TrimSpaces);
if(!conditionC) FAILED(NormalizeData); //Jump out to the outmost block
if(!conditionD) FAILED(TrimSpaces);
// --We can now trim completely or do other stuffs.
END_TEST(TrimSpaces)
// --Other code here...
if(!condition5) FAILED(NormalizeData);
//Ok, we got here. We can now process what we need to process.
END_TEST(NormalizeData)
杂乱的代码不是goto的错，而是程序员的错。不使用goto仍然可以生成意大利面条代码。
类似于dasblinkenlight的答案，但避免了if语句中的赋值，这可能会被代码评审员“修复”:
bool goOn = check0();
if (goOn) {
...
goOn = check1();
}
if (goOn) {
...
goOn = check2();
}
if (goOn) {
...
}
...
当一个步骤的结果需要在下一步之前检查时，我使用这种模式，这与所有检查都可以在前面用一个大if(check1() && check2()…类型的模式。
当然不是答案，而是一个答案(为了完整起见)
而不是:
do {
if(!check()) break;
...
...
if(!check()) break;
...
...
if(!check()) break;
...
...
} while(0);
你可以这样写:
switch (0) {
case 0:
if(!check()) break;
...
...
if(!check()) break;
...
...
if(!check()) break;
...
...
}
这仍然是一个伪装的goto，但至少它不再是一个循环。这意味着你不需要非常仔细地检查是否有一些继续隐藏在块的某处。
构造也非常简单，您可以希望编译器会优化它。
正如@jamesdlin所建议的，你甚至可以把它隐藏在一个宏后面
#define BLOC switch(0) case 0:
然后像这样使用它
BLOC {
if(!check()) break;
...
...
if(!check()) break;
...
...
if(!check()) break;
...
...
}
这是可能的，因为C语言语法期望在开关之后有一个语句，而不是一个括号中的块，并且您可以在该语句之前放置一个case标签。到目前为止，我还没有看到允许这样做的意义，但在这种特殊情况下，将开关隐藏在一个漂亮的宏后面是很方便的。
TLDR: RAII、事务性代码(仅设置结果或在已经计算时返回内容)和异常。
长一点的回答:
在C语言中，这类代码的最佳实践是在代码中添加一个EXIT/CLEANUP/other标签，在该标签中进行本地资源的清理，并返回错误代码(如果有的话)。这是最佳实践，因为它将代码自然地划分为初始化、计算、提交和返回:
error_code_type c_to_refactor(result_type *r)
{
error_code_type result = error_ok; //error_code_type/error_ok defd. elsewhere
some_resource r1, r2; // , ...;
if(error_ok != (result = computation1(&r1))) // Allocates local resources
goto cleanup;
if(error_ok != (result = computation2(&r2))) // Allocates local resources
goto cleanup;
// ...
// Commit code: all operations succeeded
*r = computed_value_n;
cleanup:
free_resource1(r1);
free_resource2(r2);
return result;
}
在C语言中，在大多数代码库中，if(error_ok !=…goto代码通常隐藏在一些方便的宏(RET(computation_result)， ENSURE_SUCCESS(computation_result, return_code)等)后面。
c++比C提供了额外的工具:
清理块功能可以作为RAII实现，这意味着您不再需要整个清理块，并允许客户端代码添加早期返回语句。 当无法继续时抛出抛出，转换所有if(error_ok !=…变成直接的通话。
等价的c++代码:
result_type cpp_code()
{
raii_resource1 r1 = computation1();
raii_resource2 r2 = computation2();
// ...
return computed_value_n;
}
这是最佳实践，因为:
It is explicit (that is, while error handling is not explicit, the main flow of the algorithm is) It is straightforward to write client code It is minimal It is simple It has no repetitive code constructs It uses no macros It doesn't use weird do { ... } while(0) constructs It is reusable with minimal effort (that is, if I want to copy the call to computation2(); to a different function, I don't have to make sure I add a do { ... } while(0) in the new code, nor #define a goto wrapper macro and a cleanup label, nor anything else).
I'm adding an answer for the sake of completeness. A number of other answers pointed out that the large condition block could be split out into a separate function. But as was also pointed out a number of times is that this approach separates the conditional code from the original context. This is one reason that lambdas were added to the language in C++11. Using lambdas was suggested by others but no explicit sample was provided. I've put one in this answer. What strikes me is that it feels very similar to the do { } while(0) approach in many ways - and maybe that means it's still a goto in disguise....
earlier operations
...
[&]()->void {
if (!check()) return;
...
...
if (!check()) return;
...
...
if (!check()) return;
...
...
}();
later operations
