Re: [sc-users] A bug in switch/case?

[Alberto de Campo <adc@xxxxxx>]

Well, the simplest use is:

	// define your cases once
d = IdentityDictionary [
	'white'	-> {in = WhiteNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
	'pink'	-> {in = PinkNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
	'brown'	-> {in = BrownNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
	'gray'	-> {in = GrayNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
	'clip'	-> {in = ClipNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
	'crackle' -> {in = Crackle.ar(param, inmul, inadd);},
	'dust'	-> {in = Dust.ar(param, inmul, inadd);}
];
	// whatever other code
...

100.do {	// maybe inside a loop,

		// you generate your case key somehow.
		// can be as complicated as you want:
	input = ['white', 'pink', 'brown'].choose;

		// and look up your case.
	d[input].value;

};

I am not sure I understand what you want beyond that.

best, adc

> Thanks Alberto, for your answer. But can we do anything with 
> IdentityDictionary?
>
> For example, the code below works, with switch:
>
>        switch (input,
>            "white",        {in = WhiteNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>            "pink",        {in = PinkNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>            "brown",        {in = BrownNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>            "gray",        {in = GrayNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>            "clip",        {in = ClipNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>            "crackle",    {in = Crackle.ar(param, inmul, inadd);},
>            "dust",        {in = Dust.ar(param, inmul, inadd);}
>        );
>
> Then, I dug into the SC list, and found this code written by hjh:
>
> c = IdentityDictionary[
>  { x == 1 } -> { "case 1".postln },
>  { x == 2 } -> { "case 2".postln },
>  { x == 3 } -> { "case 3".postln }
> ];

functions as keys make little sense to me;
but I don't know the context this comes from.


> I tried to write this:
>
>        inputdic = IdentityDictionary [
>            {input == "white"}     -> {in = WhiteNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>             {input == "pink"}         -> {in = PinkNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>              {input == "brown"}    -> {in = BrownNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>              {input == "gray"}        -> {in = GrayNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>              {input == "clip"}        -> {in = ClipNoise.ar(inmul, inadd);},
>              {input == "crackle"}    -> {in = Crackle.ar(param, 
> inmul, inadd);},
>              {input == "dust"}        -> {in = Dust.ar(param, inmul, inadd);}
>       ];
>
> But, it doesn't seem to work. I'm just wondering whether my code is 
> wrong or there is an impossibility of doing this with 
> IdentityDictionary. I should add that input is not a variable but an 
> argument of a proto-synthdef function.

the point is, if you do   dict.at(input);
you _are_ already comparing key == input to find the key,
so there is no need to wrap a function around it.

--
--
Alberto de Campo
Bergstrasse 59/33
A-8020 Graz, Austria
e-mail : decampo@xxxxxx
--