1 00:00:01,080 --> 00:00:07,260 You know understand how switch works and in what scenarios it cannot be used. 2 00:00:07,270 --> 00:00:10,360 So the next question is if it is feasible to use speech. 3 00:00:10,720 --> 00:00:14,280 Then when would you prefer to use it over an if statement. 4 00:00:14,710 --> 00:00:22,110 Let's look at few scenarios when you may want to consider using a switch one reason would be if readability 5 00:00:22,110 --> 00:00:23,400 improves. 6 00:00:23,400 --> 00:00:28,550 That is you feel if the code is more readable the switch statement than with an if statement. 7 00:00:30,350 --> 00:00:31,730 Next is intent. 8 00:00:32,180 --> 00:00:39,370 But using a switch program is deliberately making a statement that only one variable is in more of course 9 00:00:39,370 --> 00:00:42,900 you can use exhibitions like explicit by as a expression. 10 00:00:43,270 --> 00:00:47,080 But that would be very uncommon and probably a bad coding style too. 11 00:00:48,990 --> 00:00:55,010 This example demonstrates both the points readability and turned on the left we have a switch statement 12 00:00:55,140 --> 00:00:55,710 on that right. 13 00:00:55,710 --> 00:00:58,460 We have same code but explicit with an F stick. 14 00:00:58,480 --> 00:01:03,860 And as you can see the switch expression seems to be a little bit more readable in this example. 15 00:01:04,260 --> 00:01:08,080 So if readability is going to improve then you can go for a switch statement. 16 00:01:09,090 --> 00:01:14,830 Our next with regards to indent the switch statement tells us that there is only one variable called 17 00:01:14,870 --> 00:01:16,410 code involved here. 18 00:01:16,920 --> 00:01:21,930 So any future coming up is looking at the code will know that they cannot use any additional variables 19 00:01:22,110 --> 00:01:24,400 as part of the test condition. 20 00:01:24,420 --> 00:01:26,300 So intent is very clear. 21 00:01:26,620 --> 00:01:33,150 Whereas with an F statement Nothing stops a future developer from introducing both as part of his conditions 22 00:01:33,160 --> 00:01:33,610 . 23 00:01:34,050 --> 00:01:40,470 So whoever wrote this statement might have wanted to use only a single variable but that intent is never 24 00:01:40,470 --> 00:01:43,650 formally communicated due to the use of IF statement. 25 00:01:44,490 --> 00:01:48,260 So which can be preferred if readability and Dent are important. 26 00:01:50,060 --> 00:01:53,150 I think that third factor is also very important under dispute. 27 00:01:54,520 --> 00:02:00,910 Switches faster than if this is due to the fact that these liberals are known at compile time itself 28 00:02:01,810 --> 00:02:07,550 and model for each d'Este in most only a single condition there is a switch expression compared with 29 00:02:07,550 --> 00:02:08,720 the Kislev. 30 00:02:09,210 --> 00:02:15,490 This is the switch statement to be internally implemented in a way that makes it faster compared to 31 00:02:15,490 --> 00:02:24,090 an IF statement says which is implemented in an efficient way do this if there are any conditions to 32 00:02:24,090 --> 00:02:29,070 burst then an if statement in the first case will take linear time. 33 00:02:29,340 --> 00:02:35,250 Well a switch statement would take constant time that isn't the case on ornata and conditions would 34 00:02:35,250 --> 00:02:38,040 be tested when it comes to an IF statement. 35 00:02:38,520 --> 00:02:40,410 This should not be considered as an issue. 36 00:02:40,500 --> 00:02:47,010 If there are only a few conditions to test but if there are a large number of conditions are best say 37 00:02:47,040 --> 00:02:54,170 about hundred then converting from if to a speech statement can no longer be regarded as a micro-optimization 38 00:02:55,030 --> 00:03:01,670 time savings maybe very significant and a profiler can be very useful here a profile that helps you 39 00:03:01,670 --> 00:03:06,980 in analyzing the performance of your program and in understanding which parts are slowing down the program 40 00:03:06,980 --> 00:03:07,810 . 41 00:03:07,970 --> 00:03:13,370 If the profiler tells you that your chain of F's is taking a significant time then rewriting it as a 42 00:03:13,370 --> 00:03:16,540 switch may very well be a solution. 43 00:03:16,550 --> 00:03:21,950 One good profiler is a profiler which you can probably try at some point in future. 44 00:03:22,520 --> 00:03:28,220 Personally I did not use it very much but as we have just seen it's an important tool in certain scenarios 45 00:03:28,220 --> 00:03:28,880 . 46 00:03:29,150 --> 00:03:34,320 So we know also understand when a switch statement can be used in preference to an IF statement. 47 00:03:34,520 --> 00:03:35,200 Thank you.