I have the following code:
switch (pk.Substring(2, 2))
{
case "00":
ViewBag.Type = _reference.Get("14", model.Type).Value;
break;
case "01":
ViewBag.Type = _reference.Get("18", model.Type).Value;
break;
}
It does the job but does not look very clean to me. Is there some way I could make this code a bit smaller. I was thinking to just have the number 14 or 18 as a variable but I am not sure the best way to code if I should use if-else or some other way.
You could use a static dictionary as a map instead of a switch-statement.
static readonly Dictionary<string, string> map = new Dictionary<string, string> {
{ "00", "14" },
{ "01", "18" },
// ... more ...
};
// ... in your method ...
string str = pk.Substring(2, 2);
string val;
if (!map.TryGetValue(str, out val))
{
// Handle error, like in the "default:" case of the switch statement
}
else
{
ViewBag.Type = _reference.Get(val, model.Type).Value;
}
However, I would only do this, if there are really a lot of mappings that maybe can even be "read" from an external source like a configuration file.
Also note, that if the "key" is really a consecutive sequence of integers starting at 0, you might be able to use an array, where the "key" is simply the index into it.
static readonly string[] map = new string[] {
"14", "18", ...
};
int index = Int32.Parse(pk.Substring(2, 2)); // Error handling elided.
if (index < 0 || index > map.Length)
{
// Handle error, like in the "default:" case of the switch statement
}
else
{
ViewBag.Type = _reference.Get(map[index], model.Type).Value;
}
Otherwise rather stay with an explicit switch statement (possibly factoring out the assignment for more terse code):
string val;
switch (pk.Substring(2, 2))
{
case "00":
val = "14";
break;
case "01":
val = "18";
break;
// ... more ...
default:
// Error handling for unknown switch-value.
break;
}
ViewBag.Type = _reference.Get(val, model.Type).Value;
It seems that there is some relationship between "00"->"14" and "01"->"18". I believe this relationship results from the business logic. You should wrap the logic and make the code in your controller clear. Finally the code in the controller should look like:
public ActionResult MyAction()
{
//some code
ViewBag.Type = TypeProvider.GetType(pk, model.Type);
//return something
}
class TypeProvider
{
Dictionary<string, string> relations = ...
//a dictionary stores "00"->"14" logics
public static SomeType GetType(string pk, Type modelType)
{
return _reference.Get(relations[pk.SubString(2,2)], modelType).Value;
}
}
var data = pk.Substring(2, 2);
var choice = data == "00" ? "14" : (data=="01"?"18":"");
if (choice != string.Empty) ViewBag.Type = _reference.Get(choice, model.Type).Value;
I use mapping extensions fot that kind of code:
ViewBag.Type = pk.Substring(2, 2)
.Map("00", x => GetViewBagValue("14"))
.Map("01", x => GetViewBagValue("18"))
and in your case this method:
private ViewBagValue GetViewBagValue(string value)
{
return _reference.Get(value, model.Type).Value;
}
I use this. You could easily change it to generic or use eg object[] instead. Not super efficient, but very compact:
public static class Util {
public static string Switch(string value, params string[] nameValues) {
for (int x = 0; x < nameValues.Length; x += 2) {
if (nameValues[x] == value) {
return nameValues[x + 1];
}
}
return string.Empty;
}
}
Then just call that like this:
var res = Util.Switch("test2", "test1", "res1", "test2", "res2");
Best of luck!
The technical post webpages of this site follow the CC BY-SA 4.0 protocol. If you need to reprint, please indicate the site URL or the original address.Any question please contact:yoyou2525@163.com.