我一直在想这个问题——为什么不能在switch语句的case标签后面声明变量呢?在c++中，你可以在任何地方声明变量(并且在第一次使用时声明它们显然是一件好事)，但以下仍然不能工作:
switch (val)
{
case VAL:
// This won't work
int newVal = 42;
break;
case ANOTHER_VAL:
...
break;
}
上面给了我以下错误(MSC):
'newVal'的初始化被'case'标签跳过
这在其他语言中似乎也是一个限制。为什么这是一个问题?
当前回答
c++标准有: 可以将其转移到块中，但不能绕过带有初始化的声明。如果一个程序从一个具有自动存储持续时间的局部变量不在作用域中的点跳转到它在作用域中的点，那么该程序就是病态形式的，除非该变量具有POD类型(3.9)，并且声明时没有初始化式(8.5)。
说明此规则的代码:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class X {
public:
X()
{
cout << "constructor" << endl;
}
~X()
{
cout << "destructor" << endl;
}
};
template <class type>
void ill_formed()
{
goto lx;
ly:
type a;
lx:
goto ly;
}
template <class type>
void ok()
{
ly:
type a;
lx:
goto ly;
}
void test_class()
{
ok<X>();
// compile error
ill_formed<X>();
}
void test_scalar()
{
ok<int>();
ill_formed<int>();
}
int main(int argc, const char *argv[])
{
return 0;
}
显示初始化器效果的代码:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int test1()
{
int i = 0;
// There jumps fo "case 1" and "case 2"
switch(i) {
case 1:
// Compile error because of the initializer
int r = 1;
break;
case 2:
break;
};
}
void test2()
{
int i = 2;
switch(i) {
case 1:
int r;
r= 1;
break;
case 2:
cout << "r: " << r << endl;
break;
};
}
int main(int argc, const char *argv[])
{
test1();
test2();
return 0;
}
其他回答
c++标准有: 可以将其转移到块中，但不能绕过带有初始化的声明。如果一个程序从一个具有自动存储持续时间的局部变量不在作用域中的点跳转到它在作用域中的点，那么该程序就是病态形式的，除非该变量具有POD类型(3.9)，并且声明时没有初始化式(8.5)。
说明此规则的代码:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class X {
public:
X()
{
cout << "constructor" << endl;
}
~X()
{
cout << "destructor" << endl;
}
};
template <class type>
void ill_formed()
{
goto lx;
ly:
type a;
lx:
goto ly;
}
template <class type>
void ok()
{
ly:
type a;
lx:
goto ly;
}
void test_class()
{
ok<X>();
// compile error
ill_formed<X>();
}
void test_scalar()
{
ok<int>();
ill_formed<int>();
}
int main(int argc, const char *argv[])
{
return 0;
}
显示初始化器效果的代码:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int test1()
{
int i = 0;
// There jumps fo "case 1" and "case 2"
switch(i) {
case 1:
// Compile error because of the initializer
int r = 1;
break;
case 2:
break;
};
}
void test2()
{
int i = 2;
switch(i) {
case 1:
int r;
r= 1;
break;
case 2:
cout << "r: " << r << endl;
break;
};
}
int main(int argc, const char *argv[])
{
test1();
test2();
return 0;
}
Case语句只是标签。这意味着编译器将把它解释为直接跳转到标签。在c++中，这里的问题是作用域问题。花括号将作用域定义为switch语句中的所有内容。这意味着您留下了一个作用域，在这个作用域中，将跳过初始化进一步跳转到代码中。
正确的处理方法是定义一个特定于case语句的作用域，并在其中定义变量:
switch (val)
{
case VAL:
{
// This will work
int newVal = 42;
break;
}
case ANOTHER_VAL:
...
break;
}
一个switch块不同于一连串的if/else if块。我很惊讶没有其他答案能解释清楚。
考虑下面的switch语句:
switch (value) {
case 1:
int a = 10;
break;
case 2:
int a = 20;
break;
}
这可能令人惊讶，但编译器不会将其视为简单的if/else if。它将生成以下代码:
if (value == 1)
goto label_1;
else if (value == 2)
goto label_2;
else
goto label_end;
{
label_1:
int a = 10;
goto label_end;
label_2:
int a = 20; // Already declared !
goto label_end;
}
label_end:
// The code after the switch block
case语句被转换为标签，然后用goto调用。括号创建了一个新的作用域，现在很容易看出为什么不能在一个开关块中声明两个具有相同名称的变量。
它可能看起来很奇怪，但是支持fallthrough是必要的(也就是说，不使用break让执行继续到下一个case)。
这个问题最初同时被标记为c和c++。原始代码在C和c++中都是无效的，但原因完全不同，互不相关。
In C++ this code is invalid because the case ANOTHER_VAL: label jumps into the scope of variable newVal bypassing its initialization. Jumps that bypass initialization of automatic objects are illegal in C++. This side of the issue is correctly addressed by most answers. However, in C language bypassing variable initialization is not an error. Jumping into the scope of a variable over its initialization is legal in C. It simply means that the variable is left uninitialized. The original code does not compile in C for a completely different reason. Label case VAL: in the original code is attached to the declaration of variable newVal. In C language declarations are not statements. They cannot be labeled. And this is what causes the error when this code is interpreted as C code. switch (val) { case VAL: /* <- C error is here */ int newVal = 42; break; case ANOTHER_VAL: /* <- C++ error is here */ ... break; } Adding an extra {} block fixes both C++ and C problems, even though these problems happen to be very different. On the C++ side it restricts the scope of newVal, making sure that case ANOTHER_VAL: no longer jumps into that scope, which eliminates the C++ issue. On the C side that extra {} introduces a compound statement, thus making the case VAL: label to apply to a statement, which eliminates the C issue. In C case the problem can be easily solved without the {}. Just add an empty statement after the case VAL: label and the code will become valid switch (val) { case VAL:; /* Now it works in C! */ int newVal = 42; break; case ANOTHER_VAL: ... break; } Note that even though it is now valid from C point of view, it remains invalid from C++ point of view. Symmetrically, in C++ case the the problem can be easily solved without the {}. Just remove the initializer from variable declaration and the code will become valid switch (val) { case VAL: int newVal; newVal = 42; break; case ANOTHER_VAL: /* Now it works in C++! */ ... break; } Note that even though it is now valid from C++ point of view, it remains invalid from C point of view.
从C23开始，C语言中的所有标签都将被解释为标签隐含的空语句(N2508)，也就是说，在C语言中不能将标签放在声明前面的问题将不再存在，并且不再需要上述基于;的修复。
试试这个:
switch (val)
{
case VAL:
{
int newVal = 42;
}
break;
}
