Better Switch-Case for Java!

Let’s start with the question, what is wrong with the switch-case anyway? Here’s a simple example of a switch-case in Java:

Can you see the problem here? It is the unnecessary “ceremony” of writing the “break” statement on each case!

You can argue that we can just return after each case-block, while this is a brilliant idea but, then the ceremony would be of writing “return” in each block 😜 you can even miss that!

In fact, the return statement at every case-block means that every block should always “return” or “evaluate” to something! Which is the most fundamental idea in Functional Programming, where every expression must return or evaluate something just like a mathematical “function”.

value := **F(x)** <--- always returns a value!

In, fact this switch-case with always returning case blocks is omnipresent in all the FP languages as “Pattern Matching”, here is a simple determistic example code in Clojure:

Some languages like Scala, Haskell take this idea even further to allow partial match or even destructured matches on the input argument:

Enough features of other languages now! Now let’s come back to our hero here “JAVA”, can we do similar things in Java?

Yes and No.

The standard library doesn’t have any similar feature but there are a few libraries supporting this, one among those is Vavr check it out!

However, I am going to shamelessly endorse my own library for this job: “patternmatcher4j”. **** You can start by adding the dependency:

Maven:

<dependency>
    <groupId>io.github.lprakashv</groupId>
    <artifactId>patternmatcher4j</artifactId>
    <version>0.2.0</version>
</dependency>`

Gradle:

implementation 'io.github.lprakashv:patternmatcher4j:0.2.0'

Here is our simple case-match with the enum:

Now, let’s see some advanced match-cases:

Ins’nt this awesome? Short explanation of the library code-test above:

PMatcher<T, R>:

This is like an actual switch-case block, we initialize it using a constructor taking an object to be matched. This is a parameterized class where T = input matched object type and R = return type of the block.

Match Cases:

We can create a match-case using:

1. .matchValue(value) — to match the matched-object with the passed value using Java’s equals() method,
2. .matchRef(ref) — to matched the reference of the original matched-object with the passed ref.
3. .matchCase(..) — advanced matching!

Advanced matchCase():

We can match using 3 different types of cases:

1. Predicate match: To match the matched-object using a predicate. — .matchCase(p -> methodReturningBoolean(p))
2. Class match: To match the class of the matched-object — .matchCase(SomeClass.class)
3. De-structured match: To match matched-object’s fields (which internally uses Reflection API). You can even use the recursive match with the MField objects passed to the matchCase passing any of predicate, class, further de-structured matches— .matchCase(MField.with("field1", ...), MField.withValue("field2", field2Value), MField.with("field3", Field3.class))

Actions:

Each of the matchCase, matchValue and matchRef produces an object of class “CaseActionAppender” which has 3 “action” methods which you can use to define action on the preceding match-case.

1. .thenReturn(R returnValue) — to return the value on the preceding match-case.
2. .thenSupply(Supplier<R> supplier) — to evaluate the return value lazily using a supplier.
3. .thenTransform(Function<T,R> fn) — to evaluate the return value by performing transformation operation on the matched-object.

Fin

Please use the library and provide your valuable feedback, you can even raise a PR and I will look into it. This was my very first maven-central deployment so any suggestion will be welcomed :)

Thanks for reading!