swich case

hello.I'm new to c# and I want to know if there is any difference in "switch case" between c++ and c#?

The most important difference is that in C# you can "switch" on strings.

look, somewhere in my program I have written the code below:

Code:

---

  enum Direction
    {
        North,
        South,
        East,
        West,
        Up,
        Down,
        Here
    };

---

and later in my program I have written the following code:

Code:

---

    switch (direction)
            {
                case  North:
                    return  South;
                case South:
                    return North;
                case East:
                    return West;
                case West:
                    return East;
                case Up:
                    return Down;
                case Down:
                    return Up;
            }

---

it draws a red line under North, South,...giving this error:
The name 'North' does not exist in the current context.
I have no clue what is wrong with that.

Quote:

---

if there is any difference in "switch case" between c++ and c#?

---

I read somewhere that in C# switch, there is no fall-through for the cases .

DISREGARD - Was wrong. <Thank: Magos>

Use "Direction.South" inistead of just "South".
Yes there is fall-through, if by that you mean:

Code:

---

case 1:
case 2:
case 3:
  break;

default:
  break;

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nvoigt

The most important difference is that in C# you can "switch" on strings.

---

additionally, I believe that you can switch on anything that implements the equality operator, whether implicitly or explicitly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magos

Use "Direction.South" inistead of just "South".
Yes there is fall-through, if by that you mean:

Code:

---

case 1:
case 2:
case 3:
  break;

default:
  break;

---

---

One important difference is that you cannot fall through in C#. You'll get compiler warnings if you try. You can goto other labels:

Code:

---

switch(someNumber)
{
  case 1: goto case 2;
  case 2: goto case 3;
  case 3:
    MessageBox.Show("You chose: " + someNumber);
    break;

  default:
    MessageBox.Show("You did not choose 1, 2, or 3.");
    break;
}

---

The following code works perfectly fine for me, no errors, no warnings (warning level 4, highest), tested in framework 2.0, 3.5 and 4.0:

Code:

---

                        switch(someNumber)
                        {
                                case 1:
                                case 2:
                                case 3:
                                MessageBox.Show("You chose: " + someNumber);
                                break;

                                default:
                                MessageBox.Show("You did not choose 1, 2, or 3.");
                                break;
                        }

---

Sorry, you can fall through empty cases, but if you try something like this:

Code:

---

        static void Main(string[] args)
        {
            int num = 7;

            switch (num)
            {
                case 3:
                    Console.WriteLine("Doing something specific for 3 and falling through...");
                case 4:
                case 7:
                    Console.WriteLine("The number was: " + num);
                    break;
                default:
                    Console.WriteLine("The number was not 3, 4, or 7.");
            }
        }

---

... you get (notice it doesn't complain about case 4) ...

Code:

---

Microsoft (R) Visual C# 2010 Compiler version 4.0.30319.1
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Program.cs(16,17): error CS0163: Control cannot fall through from one case label ('case 3:') to another
Program.cs(21,17): error CS0163: Control cannot fall through from one case label ('default:') to another

---

Of course, falling through like that in C++ is allowed, which was the point I was trying to make. I shouldn't have used empty cases to demonstrate that.

Yeah. It's one of the limitations of how C# implements switches, I think. Not a pretty one... and one I confess I can't understand.

The switch statement is implemented through what is called a jump table in IL that is constructed from the list of offsets addresses that point to the initial instruction on every case block. However the block of instruction is well contained, because the jump table includes address offsets to every case statement. Here's the IL for istme86 code, after I added the break statements. If anyone can guess as to why these are required, I'd be happy to know:

It's not a pretty limitation, because it's the only language feature I know of on modern languages that will force you to use goto statements.

Code:

---

.method private hidebysig static void Main() cil managed
{
    .entrypoint
    .maxstack 2
    .locals init (
        [0] int32 num,
        [1] int32 CS$4$0000)
    L_0000: nop
    L_0001: ldc.i4.7
    L_0002: stloc.0
    L_0003: ldloc.0
    L_0004: stloc.1
    L_0005: ldloc.1
    L_0006: ldc.i4.3
    L_0007: sub
    L_0008: switch (L_0023, L_0030, L_0048, L_0048, L_0030)
    L_0021: br.s L_0048
    L_0023: ldstr "Doing something specific for 3 and falling through..."
    L_0028: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string)
    L_002d: nop
    L_002e: br.s L_0055
    L_0030: ldstr "The number was: "
    L_0035: ldloc.0
    L_0036: box int32
    L_003b: call string [mscorlib]System.String::Concat(object, object)
    L_0040: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string)
    L_0045: nop
    L_0046: br.s L_0055
    L_0048: ldstr "The number was not 3, 4, or 7."
    L_004d: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string)
    L_0052: nop
    L_0053: br.s L_0055
    L_0055: call string [mscorlib]System.Console::ReadLine()
    L_005a: pop
    L_005b: ret
}

---

The limitation appears to me entirely compiler based and having nothing to do with any potential limitation of the IL. Why would they do that, completely beats me.

Thank you all :)