70 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
70 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
Having two ``++cases++`` in the same ``++switch++`` statement or branches in the same ``++if++`` structure with the same implementation is at best duplicate code, and at worst a coding error. If the same logic is truly needed for both instances, then in an ``++if++`` structure they should be combined, or for a ``++switch++``, one should fall through to the other.
|
|
|
|
== Noncompliant Code Example
|
|
|
|
----
|
|
switch (i)
|
|
{
|
|
case 1:
|
|
DoFirst();
|
|
DoSomething();
|
|
break;
|
|
case 2:
|
|
DoSomethingDifferent();
|
|
break;
|
|
case 3: // Noncompliant; duplicates case 1's implementation
|
|
DoFirst();
|
|
DoSomething();
|
|
break;
|
|
default:
|
|
DoTheRest();
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (a >= 0 && a < 10)
|
|
{
|
|
DoFirst();
|
|
DoTheThing();
|
|
}
|
|
else if (a >= 10 && a < 20)
|
|
{
|
|
DoTheOtherThing();
|
|
}
|
|
else if (a >= 20 && a < 50) // Noncompliant; duplicates first condition
|
|
{
|
|
DoFirst();
|
|
DoTheThing();
|
|
}
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
== Exceptions
|
|
|
|
Blocks in an ``++if++`` chain that contain a single line of code are ignored, as are blocks in a ``++switch++`` statement that contain a single line of code with or without a following ``++break++``.
|
|
|
|
----
|
|
if (a >= 0 && a < 10)
|
|
{
|
|
DoTheThing();
|
|
}
|
|
else if (a >= 10 && a < 20)
|
|
{
|
|
DoTheOtherThing();
|
|
}
|
|
else if (a >= 20 && a < 50) //no issue, usually this is done on purpose to increase the readability
|
|
{
|
|
DoTheThing();
|
|
}
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
But this exception does not apply to ``++if++`` chains without ``++else++``-s, or to ``++switch++``-es without default clauses when all branches have the same single line of code. In case of ``++if++`` chains with ``++else++``-s, or of ``++switch++``-es with default clauses, rule S3923 raises a bug.
|
|
|
|
----
|
|
if(a == 1)
|
|
{
|
|
doSomething(); //Noncompliant, this might have been done on purpose but probably not
|
|
}
|
|
else if (a == 2)
|
|
{
|
|
doSomething();
|
|
}
|
|
----
|