Related
I want to activate disabled buttons called tglBtnLevel1, tglBtnLevel2, tglBtnLevel3... from 1 till the integer received with a method.
They only way I achieve it is using switch case, but I guess there must be a way using loops. I have tried a For loop, but I cannot find the way to include the counter (i) in the line "tglBtnLevel(i).setEnabled(true)".
I would thank you any hint or help. This is the beginning of the switch case I use to make it work, but only the first buttons, there are more:
private void checkEnabledLevels(){
switch (d.sendPlayerStats().getWeekTournamentLevel()){
case 1:
tglBtnLevel1.setEnabled(true);
break;
case 2:
tglBtnLevel1.setEnabled(true);
tglBtnLevel2.setEnabled(true);
break;
case 3:
glBtnLevel1.setEnabled(true);
tglBtnLevel2.setEnabled(true);
tglBtnLevel3.setEnabled(true);
break;
case 4:
glBtnLevel1.setEnabled(true);
tglBtnLevel2.setEnabled(true);
tglBtnLevel3.setEnabled(true);
tglBtnLevel4.setEnabled(true);
break;
One way of doing this could be to have all the buttons in an array like this:
Button[] buttonArray = {tglBtnLevel1, tglBtnLevel2, tglBtnLevel3, tglBtnLevel4}
And then simply iterator over them depending upon the tournament level you get:
int tournamentLevel = d.sendPlayerStats().getWeekTournamentLevel()
for (int i = 0; i < tournamentLevel; i++) {
buttonArray[i].setEnabled(true);
}
A slightly different but simple way of doing this could be like:
int tournamentLevel = d.sendPlayerStats().getWeekTournamentLevel()
tglBtnLevel1.setEnabled(tournamentLevel <= 1);
tglBtnLevel2.setEnabled(tournamentLevel <= 2);
tglBtnLevel3.setEnabled(tournamentLevel <= 3);
tglBtnLevel4.setEnabled(tournamentLevel <= 4);
I have different fields using the same parameters i.e. same grading scale. I want to use switch statement to return grades for different fields using the same scale. Something like this. I thought that there was something like this: switch (attend, job, initiative) { that would combine the three variables.
int attend = 5;
int job = 5;
int initiative = 5;
switch (attend) {
case 1:
getattendo = 5;
break;
case 2:
getattendo = 4;
break;
case 3:
getattendo = 3;
break;
case 4:
getattendo = 2;
case 5:
getattendo = 1;
break;
default:
getattendo = 0; // null
}
Your help is appreciated.
fmk
Enum works well with switch cases. So, you can define an enum that represents your range of value of it is a finite and reasonable range of values :
public enum OPTIONS {
OPTION1(5, 5, 5),
OPTION2(5, 2, 4),
OPTION3(1, 2, 3),
OPTION4(4, 4, 1);
private final int attend;
private final int jobs;
private final int initiative;
Directive(int attend, int jobs, int initiative) {
this.attend = attend;
this.jobs = jobs;
this.initiative = initiative;
}
// ... optional setters & getters
}
Given your create OPTION Enum, you can use a switch to handle the different cases :
switch (OPTION) {
case OPTION1:
getattendo = 5;
break;
case OPTION2:
getattendo = 4;
break;
case OPTION3:
getattendo = 3;
break;
case OPTION4:
getattendo = 2;
break;
default:
getattendo = 0; // null
break;
}
Note: Your switch is legitimate only if you have a finite number of condition. Otherwise, use a method to calculate your result.
A trick you use utilizes the unary or operation for checking binary digit presence.
This will help get you started on switching according to various conditions.
This is similar to how file permissions work in Linux.
public class ScoreCombinator {
public static final int ATTEND = 1; // binary: 001
public static final int JOB = 2; // binary: 010
public static final int INITIATIVE = 4; // binary: 100
public static void main(String[] args) {
evaluate(ATTEND | INITIATIVE); // Attend and Initiative
evaluate(INITIATIVE | ATTEND | JOB); // Attend, Job, and Initiative
}
private static void evaluate(int value) {
switch (value) {
case ATTEND: {
System.out.println("Attend");
break;
}
case ATTEND | JOB: {
System.out.println("Attend and Job");
break;
}
case ATTEND | JOB | INITIATIVE: {
System.out.println("Attend, Job, and Initiative");
break;
}
case ATTEND | INITIATIVE: {
System.out.println("Attend and Initiative");
break;
}
case JOB: {
System.out.println("Job");
break;
}
case JOB | INITIATIVE: {
System.out.println("Job and Initiative");
break;
}
case INITIATIVE: {
System.out.println("Initiative");
break;
}
}
}
}
Something like switch(a,b,c) is not possible.
If all values are the same, just use one of the valueslandmaybe verify that all values are the same).
However, there are workarounds if you want to switch-case with multiple numbers:
mathematical solution
For example, you could use prime numbers for this. As you only want to switch numbers, this is possible as long as there is a prime number higher than the highest expected value(for attend, prime and job).
Instead of switch(attend, job, initiative), you use switch((attend*prime+job)*prime+initiative) and instead of case (exampleAttend, exampleJob, exampleInitiative):, you use case ((exampleAttend*prime+exampleJob)*prime+exampleInitiative):
Note that prime must be the same in the switch and case statements.
Note that you should test if any of the input numbers is higher than the prime. This would logically lead to the default case but it could lead to collissions.
You may also want to make sure that the prime to the forth power is lower than the max value of the data type or there may be overflows.
On the other side, this method should be more performant than the second.
simple string concadation
Another option is to work with strings. As the string representation of a number is unique (to the number) and it does not contain some characters (like spaces), you can concadate those numbers and use such a character to seperate them.
Instead of switch(attend, job, initiative), you use switch(attend+" "+job+" "+initiative) and instead of case (exampleAttend,exampleJob,exampleInitiative):, you use case (exampleAttend+" "+exampleJob+" "+exampleInitiative):.
This is obviously easier and fail-safer than the first method involving prime numbers but there should be a performance impact as concadating strings is slower than multiplying ints.
Another possibility is to use enums. Look at the other answer by #Hassam Abdelillah
if you want to know how this works. If you like the enum approach, feel free to upvote the other answer.
Is there a way to grab the resulting number from each iteration of this loop and compare it to the next?
This is a Slot Machine Sim in Java,
I'm trying to find a way to see how many of the results match.
so I thought I would capture the number that is resulted from each round of the For loop and compare it to the previous one.
but I have no idea how to write that?
is there a better way to do this?
what I have so far:
for (int count=1; count<= 3 ; ++count)
{
number = slotM.nextInt(6);
switch (number)
{
case 0:
System.out.print("-cherries-");
break;
case 1:
System.out.print("-Oranges-");
break;
case 2:
System.out.print("-Palms-");
break;
case 3:
System.out.print("-Bells-");
break;
case 4:
System.out.print("-Melones-");
break;
default:
System.out.print("-Bars-");
break;
}
System.out.print(number);
}
Yep there are several better ways. If you have a fixed number of options (6 in your case) an enum might be a good option:
enum Picture {
CHERRIES, ORANGES, PALMS, BELLS, MELONS, BARS;
public String getName() {
return "-" + name().substring(0, 1) + name().substring(1).toLowerCase() + "-";
}
That way you can store your numbers as pictures rather than numbers.
Picture pictures[3];
Random random = new Random();
for (int i = 0; i < pictures.length; i++)
picture[i] = Picture.values[random.nextInt(pictures.length)];
To get the printed version:
for (Picture picture: picture)
System.out.print(picture.getName());
You’ll need some kind of storage outside of the loop so that each iteration can reference it.
int[] results Look in to arrays - you can put the results of each round into a part of the array, and look up the value.
You are declaring your count variable in the for loop, just declare outside and make a comparison with it
I have a chunk of code that needs to determine if a given integer is between a set of other integers. I'd also like to have this in a case statement so as to not have a surplus of if..else statements everywhere. Here's a bit of the code:
switch (copies) {
case copies >= 0 && copies <= 99: copyPrice = 0.30; break;
case copies >= 100 && copies <= 499: copyPrice = 0.28; break;
case copies >= 500 && copies <= 749: copyPrice = 0.27; break;
case copies >= 750 && copies <= 1000: copyPrice = 0.26; break;
case copies > 1000: copies = 0.25; break;
}
where copies is an integer and copyPrice is a double. I get several errors saying that it expects to receive a integer but gets a boolean instead. What is the best (or optimal) way of setting this up? Any help is greatly appreciated!
This line (and similar):
case copies >= 0 && copies <= 99:
Returns a compiler error since it gives a boolean but the compiler expects an int since copy is declared as int.
One way to solve this is using an array with the desired ranks, and have a switch statement for the index found:
public double calculateCopyPrice(int copies) {
int[] range = { 99, 499, 749, 1000 };
double copyPrice = 0;
int index = -1;
for (int i = 0; i < range.length; i++) {
if (range[i] >= copies) {
index = i;
break;
}
}
switch (index) {
case 0: copyPrice = 0.30; break;
case 1: copyPrice = 0.28; break;
case 2: copyPrice = 0.27; break;
case 3: copyPrice = 0.26; break;
default: copyPrice = 0.25; break;
}
//probably more logic here...
return copyPrice;
}
After some tests, I've found a more flexible solution using a TreeMap<Integer, Double> which allows you to have a specie of range (what you're looking for) and ease the search by using TreeMap#ceilingEntry:
//TreeMap to store the "ranges"
TreeMap<Integer, Double> theMap = new TreeMap<Integer, Double>();
//add the data
theMap.put(99, 0.3);
theMap.put(499, 0.28);
theMap.put(749, 0.27);
theMap.put(1000, 0.26);
//the "default" value for max entries
theMap.put(Integer.MAX_VALUE, 0.25);
//testing the solution
Double ex1 = theMap.ceilingEntry(50).getValue();
Double ex2 = theMap.ceilingEntry(500).getValue();
Double ex3 = theMap.ceilingEntry(5000).getValue();
Double ex4 = theMap.ceilingEntry(100).getValue();
System.out.println(ex1);
System.out.println(ex2);
System.out.println(ex3);
System.out.println(ex4);
java has no native concept of "ranges", let alone support for them in case statements.
usually, when faced with this kind of logic i personally would do one of 2 things:
just have a chain of if-else statements. doesnt even habe to be a chain:
public static double calculateCopyPrice(int copies) {
if (copies > 1000) return 0.25;
if (copies >= 750) return 0.26;
//etc
}
this code has no "else" branches and is just as much typing as the switch syntax you'd like. possibly even less (i only check a single bound every time)
you could use an enum, say:
public enum Division {UNDER_100, 100_to_500, ... }
and then :
Division division = categorize(copies);
switch (division) {
case UNDER_100:
//etc
}
but this is serious overkill for what youre trying to do. i'd use that if this division is also useful elsewhere in your code.
Switch case function must have an exact number in case. For example:
case 0:
case 1:
You're trying to use case from some value to some value and it's not implemented that way in Java. For your problem, you must use if-else statement since it's impossible to do it with switch case. Hope it helped.
Look the problem is very basic..
In a switch statement it allows only the following datatypes and wrapper classes
Byte,short,char,int,Byte,Short,Character,Integer,enum,String..
If you are passing anything other than that will give you an error.
In your case the condition which you are evaluating will give you result which is a Boolean value.
NavigableMap.seilingEntry() may be a good solution in many cases,
but in other cases the following may be clearer:
double getPrice(int copies){
return copies>1000 ? 0.25
: copies>750 ? 0.26
: copies>500 ? 0.27
: copies>100 ? 0.28
: copies>0 ? 0.30
: 0; // or check this condition first, throwing an exception
}
Why doesn't the compiler automatically put break statements after each code block in the switch? Is it for historical reasons? When would you want multiple code blocks to execute?
Sometimes it is helpful to have multiple cases associated with the same code block, such as
case 'A':
case 'B':
case 'C':
doSomething();
break;
case 'D':
case 'E':
doSomethingElse();
break;
etc. Just an example.
In my experience, usually it is bad style to "fall through" and have multiple blocks of code execute for one case, but there may be uses for it in some situations.
Historically, it's because the case was essentially defining a label, also known as the target point of a goto call. The switch statement and its associated cases really just represent a multiway branch with multiple potential entry points into a stream of code.
All that said, it has been noted a nearly infinite number of times that break is almost always the default behavior that you'd rather have at the end of every case.
Java comes from C and that is the syntax from C.
There are times where you want multiple case statements to just have one execution path.
Below is a sample that will tell you how many days in a month.
class SwitchDemo2 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int month = 2;
int year = 2000;
int numDays = 0;
switch (month) {
case 1:
case 3:
case 5:
case 7:
case 8:
case 10:
case 12:
numDays = 31;
break;
case 4:
case 6:
case 9:
case 11:
numDays = 30;
break;
case 2:
if ( ((year % 4 == 0) && !(year % 100 == 0))
|| (year % 400 == 0) )
numDays = 29;
else
numDays = 28;
break;
default:
System.out.println("Invalid month.");
break;
}
System.out.println("Number of Days = " + numDays);
}
}
I think it is a mistake. As a language construct it is just as easy to have break as the default and instead have a fallthrough keyword. Most of the code I have written and read has a break after every case.
You can do all sorts of interesting things with case fall-through.
For example, lets say you want to do a particular action for all cases, but in a certain case you want to do that action plus something else. Using a switch statement with fall-through would make it quite easy.
switch (someValue)
{
case extendedActionValue:
// do extended action here, falls through to normal action
case normalActionValue:
case otherNormalActionValue:
// do normal action here
break;
}
Of course, it is easy to forget the break statement at the end of a case and cause unexpected behavior. Good compilers will warn you when you omit the break statement.
Why doesn't the compiler automatically put break statements after each code block in the switch?
Leaving aside the good desire to be able to use the identical block for several cases (which could be special-cased)...
Is it for historical reasons? When would you want multiple code blocks to execute?
It's mainly for compatibility with C, and is arguably an ancient hack from the days of old when goto keywords roamed the earth. It does enable some amazing things, of course, such as Duff's Device, but whether that's a point in its favor or against is… argumentative at best.
The break after switch cases is used to avoid the fallthrough in the switch statements. Though interestingly this now can be achieved through the newly formed switch labels as implemented via JEP-325.
With these changes, the break with every switch case can be avoided as demonstrated further :-
public class SwitchExpressionsNoFallThrough {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Scanner scanner = new Scanner(System.in);
int value = scanner.nextInt();
/*
* Before JEP-325
*/
switch (value) {
case 1:
System.out.println("one");
case 2:
System.out.println("two");
default:
System.out.println("many");
}
/*
* After JEP-325
*/
switch (value) {
case 1 ->System.out.println("one");
case 2 ->System.out.println("two");
default ->System.out.println("many");
}
}
}
On executing the above code with JDK-12, the comparative output could be seen as
//input
1
// output from the implementation before JEP-325
one
two
many
// output from the implementation after JEP-325
one
and
//input
2
// output from the implementation before JEP-325
two
many
// output from the implementation after JEP-325
two
and of course the thing unchanged
// input
3
many // default case match
many // branches to 'default' as well
So you do not have to repeat code if you need several cases to do the same thing:
case THIS:
case THAT:
{
code;
break;
}
Or you can do things like :
case THIS:
{
do this;
}
case THAT:
{
do that;
}
In a cascade fashion.
Really bug/confusion prone, if you ask me.
As far as the historical record goes, Tony Hoare invented the case statement in the 1960s, during the "structured programming" revolution. Tony's case statement supported multiple labels per case and automatic exit with no stinking break statements. The requirement for an explicit break was something that came out of the BCPL/B/C line. Dennis Ritchie writes (in ACM HOPL-II):
For example, the endcase that escapes from a BCPL switchon statement was not present in the language
when we learned it in the 1960s, and so the overloading of the break keyword to escape
from the B and C switch statement owes to divergent evolution rather than conscious change.
I haven't been able to find any historical writings about BCPL, but Ritchie's comment suggests that the break was more or less a historical accident. BCPL later fixed the problem, but perhaps Ritchie and Thompson were too busy inventing Unix to be bothered with such a detail :-)
Java is derived from C, whose heritage includes a technique known as Duff's Device .
It's an optimization that relies on the fact that control falls through from one case to the next, in the absence of a break; statement. By the time C was standardized, there was plenty of code like that "in the wild", and it would have been counterproductive to change the language to break such constructions.
As people said before, it is to allow fall-through and it is not a mistake, it is a feature.
If too many break statements annoy you, you can easily get rid of them by using return statements instead. This is actually a good practice, because your methods should be as small as possible (for the sake of readability and maintainability), so a switch statement is already big enough for a method, hence, a good method should not contain anything else, this is an example:
public class SwitchTester{
private static final Log log = LogFactory.getLog(SwitchTester.class);
public static void main(String[] args){
log.info(monthsOfTheSeason(Season.WINTER));
log.info(monthsOfTheSeason(Season.SPRING));
log.info(monthsOfTheSeason(Season.SUMMER));
log.info(monthsOfTheSeason(Season.AUTUMN));
}
enum Season{WINTER, SPRING, SUMMER, AUTUMN};
static String monthsOfTheSeason(Season season){
switch(season){
case WINTER:
return "Dec, Jan, Feb";
case SPRING:
return "Mar, Apr, May";
case SUMMER:
return "Jun, Jul, Aug";
case AUTUMN:
return "Sep, Oct, Nov";
default:
//actually a NullPointerException will be thrown before reaching this
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Season must not be null");
}
}
}
The execution prints:
12:37:25.760 [main] INFO lang.SwitchTester - Dec, Jan, Feb
12:37:25.762 [main] INFO lang.SwitchTester - Mar, Apr, May
12:37:25.762 [main] INFO lang.SwitchTester - Jun, Jul, Aug
12:37:25.762 [main] INFO lang.SwitchTester - Sep, Oct, Nov
as expected.
It is an old question but actually I ran into using the case without break statement today. Not using break is actually very useful when you need to combine different functions in sequence.
e.g. using http response codes to authenticate user with time token
server response code 401 - token is outdated -> regenerate token and log user in.
server response code 200 - token is OK -> log user in.
in case statements:
case 404:
case 500:
{
Log.v("Server responses","Unable to respond due to server error");
break;
}
case 401:
{
//regenerate token
}
case 200:
{
// log in user
break;
}
Using this you do not need to call log in user function for 401 response because when the token is regenerated, the runtime jumps into the case 200.
Not having an automatic break added by the compiler makes it possible to use a switch/case to test for conditions like 1 <= a <= 3 by removing the break statement from 1 and 2.
switch(a) {
case 1: //I'm between 1 and 3
case 2: //I'm between 1 and 3
case 3: //I'm between 1 and 3
break;
}
because there are situations where you want to flow through the first block for example to avoid writing the same code in multiple blocks but still be able to divide them for mroe control. There are also a ton of other reasons.
You can makes easily to separate other type of number, month, count.
This is better then if in this case;
public static void spanishNumbers(String span){
span = span.toLowerCase().replace(" ", "");
switch (span){
case "1":
case "jan": System.out.println("uno"); break;
case "2":
case "feb": System.out.println("dos"); break;
case "3":
case "mar": System.out.println("tres"); break;
case "4":
case "apr": System.out.println("cuatro"); break;
case "5":
case "may": System.out.println("cinco"); break;
case "6":
case "jun": System.out.println("seis"); break;
case "7":
case "jul": System.out.println("seite"); break;
case "8":
case "aug": System.out.println("ocho"); break;
case "9":
case "sep": System.out.println("nueve"); break;
case "10":
case "oct": System.out.println("diez"); break;
}
}
I am now working on project where I am in need of break in my switch statement otherwise the code won't work. Bear with me and I will give you a good example of why you need break in your switch statement.
Imagine you have three states, one that waits for the user to enter a number, the second to calculate it and the third to print the sum.
In that case you have:
State1 - Wait for user to enter a number
State2 - Print the sum
state3 - Calculate the sum
Looking at the states, you would want the order of exaction to start on state1, then state3 and finally state2. Otherwise we will only print users input without calculating the sum. Just to clarify it again, we wait for the user to enter a value, then calculate the sum and prints the sum.
Here is an example code:
while(1){
switch(state){
case state1:
// Wait for user input code
state = state3; // Jump to state3
break;
case state2:
//Print the sum code
state = state3; // Jump to state3;
case state3:
// Calculate the sum code
state = wait; // Jump to state1
break;
}
}
If we don't use break, it will execute in this order, state1, state2 and state3. But using break, we avoid this scenario, and can order in the right procedure which is to begin with state1, then state3 and last but not least state2.
Exactly, because with some clever placement you can execute blocks in cascade.