On 04/25/11 14:27, Ian Molton wrote: > On Fri, 2011-04-22 at 13:51 +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote: >> Hiding things you miss when reading the code, it's a classic for >> people to do if(foo) bleh(); on the same line, and whoever reads >> the code will expect the action on the next line, especially if foo >> is a long complex statement. >> >> It's one of these 'just don't do it, it bites you in the end' things. > > Meh. I dont see it that way... > > Sure, if it was one line out of 20 written that way, it would be weird, > but as is, its just part of a block of identical lines.
It is a matter of consistency, we allow it in one place, we suddenly have it all over. The moment someone wants to add a slightly more complex case to such a switch statement it is all down the drain. It is way better to stay consistent across the board. > I dont really see a parallel with the if() statement either since the > condition in the switch() case isnt on the same line as such. I must > admit that I only write one-liner if statements if the condition is > short though. Writing one-liner if() statements is inherently broken, or you could call it the Perl syndrome. Write-once, read-never..... Jes
