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

使用异常。您的代码将看起来更加清晰(并且创建异常正是为了处理程序执行流中的错误)。有关清理资源(文件描述符,数据库连接等),请阅读文章“为什么c++不提供一个“finally”结构?”

#include <iostream>
#include <stdexcept>   // For exception, runtime_error, out_of_range

int main () {
    try {
        if (!condition)
            throw std::runtime_error("nope.");
        ...
        if (!other condition)
            throw std::runtime_error("nope again.");
        ...
        if (!another condition)
            throw std::runtime_error("told you.");
        ...
        if (!yet another condition)
            throw std::runtime_error("OK, just forget it...");
    }
    catch (std::runtime_error &e) {
        std::cout << e.what() << std::endl;
    }
    catch (...) {
        std::cout << "Caught an unknown exception\n";
    }
    return 0;
}

其他回答

如果根据故障发生的位置需要不同的清理步骤,另一个模式很有用:

    private ResultCode DoEverything()
    {
        ResultCode processResult = ResultCode.FAILURE;
        if (DoStep1() != ResultCode.SUCCESSFUL)
        {
            Step1FailureCleanup();
        }
        else if (DoStep2() != ResultCode.SUCCESSFUL)
        {
            Step2FailureCleanup();
            processResult = ResultCode.SPECIFIC_FAILURE;
        }
        else if (DoStep3() != ResultCode.SUCCESSFUL)
        {
            Step3FailureCleanup();
        }
        ...
        else
        {
            processResult = ResultCode.SUCCESSFUL;
        }
        return processResult;
    }

如果你的代码有一个很长的If ..else If ..else语句块,你可以尝试在函子或函数指针的帮助下重写整个块。这可能并不总是正确的解决方案,但通常是正确的。

http://www.cprogramming.com/tutorial/functors-function-objects-in-c++.html

我对这里提出的不同答案的数量感到惊讶。但是,最后在我必须更改的代码中(即删除这个do-while(0)黑客或任何东西),我做了一些与这里提到的任何答案不同的事情,我很困惑为什么没有人想到这一点。以下是我所做的:

初始代码:

do {

    if(!check()) break;
    ...
    ...
    if(!check()) break;
    ...
    ...
    if(!check()) break;
    ...
    ...
} while(0);

finishingUpStuff.

Now:

finish(params)
{
  ...
  ...
}

if(!check()){
    finish(params);    
    return;
}
...
...
if(!check()){
    finish(params);    
    return;
}
...
...
if(!check()){
    finish(params);    
    return;
}
...
...

所以,这里所做的是,整理的东西被隔离在一个函数中,事情突然变得如此简单和干净!

我认为这个解决方案值得一提,所以在这里提供了它。

你可以使用一个简单的bool变量的延续模式:

bool goOn;
if ((goOn = check0())) {
    ...
}
if (goOn && (goOn = check1())) {
    ...
}
if (goOn && (goOn = check2())) {
    ...
}
if (goOn && (goOn = check3())) {
    ...
}

这个执行链将在checkN返回false时停止。由于&&操作符短路,将不再执行进一步的检查…()调用。此外,优化编译器足够聪明,可以识别将goOn设置为false是单行道,并为您插入缺少的goto结尾。因此,上面代码的性能将与do/while(0)相同,只是对其可读性没有严重的影响。

Try to extract the code into a separate function (or perhaps more than one). Then return from the function if the check fails. If it's too tightly coupled with the surrounding code to do that, and you can't find a way to reduce the coupling, look at the code after this block. Presumably, it cleans up some resources used by the function. Try to manage these resources using an RAII object; then replace each dodgy break with return (or throw, if that's more appropriate) and let the object's destructor clean up for you. If the program flow is (necessarily) so squiggly that you really need a goto, then use that rather than giving it a weird disguise. If you have coding rules that blindly forbid goto, and you really can't simplify the program flow, then you'll probably have to disguise it with your do hack.