collapsing LFUN_XYZ_APPLY together

[Angus Leeming]

As John has noted, these differnet LFUNs are sufficiently similar to make 
the thought of collapsing them together attractive.

My question: should I use these switches or should I use if-blocks?
Angus

        case LFUN_INDEX_APPLY:
        case LFUN_REF_APPLY: {
                dispatch_result result = UNDISPATCHED;

                string name;
                switch (ev.action) {
                case LFUN_INDEX_APPLY: name = "index"; break;
                case LFUN_REF_APPLY:   name = "ref";   break;
                default: break;
                }

                InsetBase * base = owner_->getDialogs().getOpenInset(name);
                Inset * inset = 0;
                if (base) {
                        // This works both for 'original' and 'mathed' insets.
                        result = base->localDispatch(ev);
                } else {
                        InsetCommandParams params;
                        InsetCommandMailer::string2params(ev.argument, params);

                        switch (ev.action) {
                        case LFUN_INDEX_APPLY:
                                inset = new InsetIndex(params);
                                break;
                        case LFUN_REF_APPLY:
                                inset = new InsetRef(params, *buffer_);
                                break;
                        default:
                                break;
                        }

                        if (insertInset(inset)) {
                                updateInset(inset, true);
                                result = DISPATCHED;
                        } else {
                                delete inset;
                                result = UNDISPATCHED;
                        }
                }
        }
        break;


-- 
Angus