3 ms·
Straight from the tutorial: "Since the switch value is just true, we could leave it off—as is also the situation in a for statement, a missing value means true
by chrisjsmith 15y ago
Straight from the tutorial:
"Since the switch value is just true, we could leave it off—as is also the situation in a for statement, a missing value means true. In fact, such a switch is a form of if-else chain. While we're here, it should be mentioned that in switch statements each case has an implicit break."
The basic outcome is that:
1. The assignment to er, nr is an initialization statement for the switch.
2. The true (default value if not specified) is used to configure the switch as an if-else chain which is required as the assignment above makes the purpose of the switch ambiguous (is the result of the assignment configuring the switch - how do you do that as multiple values are returned?).
You could rewrite it:
nr, er := f.Read(buf[:]);
switch true {
...
}
or even:
nr, er := f.Read(buf[:]);
switch {
...
}
But the switch initializer scopes it to the switch block cleanly.
- zvrba 15y ago"switch true {...}" or "switch {...}"? really? So how would switch 3.141592654 { ... } affect the case-statements inside?
- chrisjsmith 15y agoNo idea as I wouldn't do it :) (sorry - cop out that)
- supersillyus 15y agoWhen you say "switch <value>", it matches the "case" statements based on if the value after "case" is equal to <value>. So, if you say const P = 3.141 switch 3.141 { case P: fmt.Println("This prints") } When no value is specified after "switch", the value of "true" is implied, which is why you can do: switch { case a && b: .. case something(): }