Commit 5bbf065

The biggest push back on this idea is that we already have this problem solved.

You write the following code.

switch = {

1: method_on_one,

2: method_on_two,

3, method_on_three

}

result = switch.get(value, defult_method_to_run)()

This works but is very low on the functionality level. We have a better solution here

I believe. Let's take this example and see how it looks in python-switch vs raw dicts:

while True:

action = get_action(action)

with switch(action) as s:

s.case(['c', 'a'], create_account)

s.case('l', log_into_account)

s.case('r', register_cage)

s.case('u', update_availability)

s.case(['v', 'b'], view_bookings)

s.case('x', exit_app)

s.case('', lambda: None)

s.case(range(1,6), lambda: set_level(action))

s.default(unknown_command)

result = s.result

Now compare that to they espoused *pythonic* way:

while True:

action = get_action(action)

switch = {

'c': create_account,

'a': create_account,

'l': log_into_account,

'r': register_cage,

'u': update_availability,

'v': view_bookings,

'b': view_bookings,

'x': exit_app,

1: lambda: set_level(action),

2: lambda: set_level(action),

3: lambda: set_level(action),

4: lambda: set_level(action),

5: lambda: set_level(action),

'': lambda: None,

}

result = switch.get(action, unknown_command)()

Personally, I much prefer to read and write the on above. That's why I wrote this module.

It seems to convey the intent of swtich way more than the dict. But either are options.