terryyin
commented
8 years ago @vicgonzalez theoretically, each "case" is just an if statement and adding one branch, leaving the branch empty might reduce the possible output but doesn't reduce the possible inputs. From testing perspective, the amount of tests needed is decided by the possible inputs not the outputs. Just like an if statement with one condition will add 1 cc with or without an else statement. And by the way, if an 'if' statement's condition contains an "OR" or "AND" it will be counted as 2. Again, think of the amount of possible input instead of output.
However, in reality the conditions in a switch/case statement usually have some inherent constraints and do not really add that much possible inputs (that are meaningful). So there're different opinions.
Some people contributed a -m option to Lizard to "Calculate modified cyclomatic complexity number," which will count the entire switch/case as one CC. So just run:
lizard -mWill do.
Personally, I would not use it. Because if there is really an inherent constraint with the cases, I would use an array or a dictionary to ensure that constraint, instead of using switch/cases and leave too many possibilities. Or polymorphism, as many OO people would suggest, which in my speculation, might be a better alternative for several "cases" sharing one piece of code.
vicgonzalez
If several "case:" labels in a switch are together (without other statements or breaks in the middle) they are treated as separate paths increasing the complexity number. switch(var){ case 1: case 2: doSomething(); break; } Since they are like ORs, they should be treated as one single execution path. Has to be taken into account also for the modified cyclomatic complexity.