Hi, i wrote this line of code, but i'm not

Question

Hi, i wrote this line of code, but i'm not

sure how to refactor it to make it more readable and/or concise

if (((curveType == CurveType::ENVELOPE || curveType == CurveType::LFO) && points.size() >= 1) || (curveType == CurveType::GRAPH && points.size() >= 2)) {

is there a way to do the same boolean operations but a bit nicer to read?

0

26.09.2021

6 ответов

5 просмотров

artemetra 🇺🇦 [less active] Автор вопроса

no, i only have 2 cases - either the configuration i have is valid or it isn't and that code validates it

0

26.09.2021

Mihai

bool isEnvelope = (curveType == Envelope) bool isLFO = (curveType == LFO) bool has1Point = (points.size >=1) bool isGraph = (curveType == Graph) bool has2Points = (points.size >= 2) IF ( (isEnvelope || LFO) && has1Point) || (isGraph && has2Points) ) { //... }

0

26.09.2021

artemetra 🇺🇦 [less active] Автор вопроса

Mihai
bool isEnvelope = (curveType == Envelope) bool isL...

not sure if it's "the c++ way",, from one perspective it's readability but from the other it's redundant code, i most likely won't use those statements again

0

26.09.2021

Avihay B

Depends on what you want to do, and how much of it. This could be more concise, especially if you have more options in the enum: bool hasEnoughPoints(CurveType ct, int pNum) { switch (ct) { case CurveType::ENVELOPE: case CurveType::LFO: return pNum >= 2; case CurveType::GRAPH: return pNum >= 1; default: return false; } }

0

26.09.2021

artemetra 🇺🇦 [less active] Автор вопроса

Avihay B
Depends on what you want to do, and how much of it...

thank you! i currently don't have more options in the enum, and it's highly likely i won't have any more, but i'll take your suggestion into consideration

0

27.09.2021

SHEIKH HAFIJUL ALI ALI [🄾🄵🄵🄻🄸🄽🄴] · Accepted Answer

SHEIKH HAFIJUL ALI ALI [🄾🄵🄵🄻🄸🄽🄴]

use switch case

0

26.09.2021

Похожие чаты

Hi, i wrote this line of code, but i'm not

6 ответов

Похожие вопросы