1207

I need multiple cases in switch statement in JavaScript, Something like:

switch (varName)
{
   case "afshin", "saeed", "larry":
       alert('Hey');
       break;

   default:
       alert('Default case');
       break;
}

How can I do that? If there's no way to do something like that in JavaScript, I want to know an alternative solution that also follows the DRY concept.

2
  • 1
    Sad that this syntax is not working :( Commented Aug 26, 2021 at 11:46
  • the syntax is valid but it will only check on the last case, javascript should throw an error in such a case Commented Mar 22, 2023 at 21:24

26 Answers 26

2453

Use the fall-through feature of the switch statement. A matched case will run until a break (or the end of the switch statement) is found, so you could write it like:

switch (varName)
{
   case "afshin":
   case "saeed":
   case "larry": 
       alert('Hey');
       break;

   default: 
       alert('Default case');
}
10
  • 22
  • 2
    Somehow it works for me in Chrome, in the javascript console: switch('10') { case 1, '10': console.log('ok') } prints ok
    – nafg
    Commented Sep 3, 2013 at 4:18
  • 9
    @nafg: Try switch(1). The label here is just a comma expression.
    – kennytm
    Commented Sep 3, 2013 at 7:10
  • 4
    @Barney No, without the break you can fall through to the next case.
    – Seiyria
    Commented Apr 24, 2015 at 17:21
  • 1
    @Seiyira by definition, there is no next case after the last. Besides, it's a default.
    – Barney
    Commented Apr 24, 2015 at 17:22
166

This works in regular JavaScript:

function theTest(val) {
  var answer = "";
  switch( val ) {
    case 1: case 2: case 3:
      answer = "Low";
      break;
    case 4: case 5: case 6:
      answer = "Mid";
      break;
    case 7: case 8: case 9:
      answer = "High";
      break;
    default:
      answer = "Massive or Tiny?";
  }
  return answer;
}

theTest(9);
7
  • 31
    @believesInSanta it's literally just normal case fallthrough with weird formatting (spaces instead of newlines) Commented Feb 2, 2019 at 14:12
  • 4
    You also can use case (1||2||3): instead of case 1: case 2: case 3: Commented Nov 16, 2020 at 8:54
  • 2
    case 1: case 2: case 3: worked for me and thanks, but @kasun Your solution does'nt work. Commented May 3, 2021 at 9:37
  • 2
    just an fyi, I tried @Kasun's method in TS, and it didn't work for me (I'm aware that OP wanted the solution in JS)
    – George.
    Commented Jun 7, 2021 at 21:35
  • 3
    The reason why @KasunHasanga's suggested solution doesn't work is because case (1||2||3): is equivalent to case 1: (since 1||2||3 evaluates to 1). Commented Aug 10, 2021 at 12:00
48

Here's different approach avoiding the switch statement altogether:

var cases = {
  afshin: function() { alert('hey'); },
  _default: function() { alert('default'); }
};
cases.larry = cases.saeed = cases.afshin;

cases[ varName ] ? cases[ varName ]() : cases._default();
11
  • 8
    I definitely prefer this version. Fall through is a bug-prone feature of switch ... case. It's too easy to forget a break statement, and if you use fall through intentionally, those forgotten break statements can be very hard to spot. This method lookup version also has lots of great features that switch ... case lacks, such as dynamic extensibility, or the ability to completely replace the object to accomplish mode switching. It's also easier to keep cleanly organized, and can lead to more maintainable code. See ericleads.com/2012/12/switch-case-considered-harmful Commented Sep 22, 2013 at 11:28
  • 43
    I always add a comment //fallthrough in place of break whenever I intentionally omit the break. That helps to identify when it's a mistake and when it's intentional.
    – Mnebuerquo
    Commented Jul 24, 2014 at 13:58
  • 26
    Intuitive approach. However, for readability, I'd recommend to use the native switch statement. Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 15:01
  • 55
    One can always scratch the left ear passing its right hand through the back of the neck... (sorry for my english, I mean: "one can always complicate things as much as possible...in this case, avoiding the switch statement in favor of this complicated solution doesn't seem to be the right thing to do...) Commented Nov 17, 2014 at 13:53
  • 43
    I'm truly amazed how this has gotten 34 up votes. In terms of readability and maintainability, this is absolutely horrific. If I want to see what conditions will trigger something, a case statement is incredibly simple and easy to see by looking at the labels. On the other hand, your version would require someone read pretty much every single line and see what you assigned where. This also gets even worse the more cases you want to match.
    – michael
    Commented May 7, 2016 at 18:51
35

In Javascript to assign multiple cases in a switch, we have to define different case without break inbetween like given below:

   <script>
      function checkHere(varName){
        switch (varName)
           {
           case "saeed":
           case "larry":
           case "afshin":
                alert('Hey');
                break;
          case "ss":
               alert('ss');
               break;
         default:
               alert('Default case');
               break;
       }
      }
     </script>

Please see example click on link

1
  • 5
    It's a common technique in a pletora of languages, not bound to JS
    – drAlberT
    Commented Dec 12, 2013 at 15:06
31

I like this for clarity and a DRY syntax.

varName = "larry";

switch (true)
{
    case ["afshin", "saeed", "larry"].includes(varName) :
       alert('Hey');
       break;

    default:
       alert('Default case');

}
2
  • This is just an over-complicated if-condition
    – N1ark
    Commented Mar 29, 2023 at 15:10
  • instead of if (true) you're saying if ("true" == "true") Commented Jan 20 at 17:54
24

If you're using ES6, you can do this:

if (['afshin', 'saeed', 'larry'].includes(varName)) {
   alert('Hey');
} else {
   alert('Default case');
}

Or for earlier versions of JavaScript, you can do this:

if (['afshin', 'saeed', 'larry'].indexOf(varName) !== -1) {
   alert('Hey');
} else {
   alert('Default case');
}

Note that includes won't work in some browser including older IE versions, but you could patch things up fairly easily. See the question determine if string is in list in javascript for more information.

6
  • What is the benefit of this over a switch?
    – SNYDERHAUS
    Commented Jul 18, 2019 at 15:19
  • 5
    @BryceSnyder the difference between an expression and a statement? Less typing? Fewer vertical lines consumed? Greater expressive power through succinctness and density of representation? Better semantics through the includes word? Take your pick.
    – ErikE
    Commented Jul 18, 2019 at 15:21
  • 3
    The benefit for me is, i can use the array from an external config source and after the array is changed externally the code still works.
    – vindom
    Commented Jan 11, 2021 at 9:25
  • This is my preferred option, these blocks of case options seem crazy, includes can use the original array instead of extracting elements individually.
    – Jeremy
    Commented May 16, 2021 at 9:08
  • 1
    This is a pretty reliable option, the only drawback is that it isn't as readable as a switch statement. Commented May 16, 2021 at 17:04
15

My situation was something akin to:

switch (text) {
  case SOME_CONSTANT || ANOTHER_CONSTANT:
    console.log('Case 1 entered');

  break;

  case THIRD_CONSTANT || FINAL_CONSTANT:
    console.log('Case 2 entered');

  break;

  default:
    console.log('Default entered');
}

The default case always entered. If you're running into a similar multi-case switch statement issue, you're looking for this:

switch (text) {
  case SOME_CONSTANT:
  case ANOTHER_CONSTANT:
    console.log('Case 1 entered');

  break;

  case THIRD_CONSTANT:
  case FINAL_CONSTANT:
    console.log('Case 2 entered');

  break;

  default:
    console.log('Default entered');
}
10

Adding and clarifying Stefano's answer, you can use expressions to dynamically set the values for the conditions in switch, e.g.:

var i = 3
switch (i) {
    case ((i>=0 && i<=5) ? i : -1):
        console.log('0-5');
        break;

    case 6: console.log('6');
}

So in your problem, you could do something like:

var varName = "afshin"
switch (varName) {
    case (["afshin", "saeed", "larry"].indexOf(varName)+1 && varName):
      console.log("hey");
      break;

    default:
      console.log('Default case');
}

Although it is so much DRY...

1
  • not yet tested but it would be interesting to modify varName inside the case expression, expect that varName is cached thou.
    – Valen
    Commented Jan 27, 2018 at 3:22
8

In Node.js it appears that you are allowed to do this:

data = "10";
switch(data){
    case "1": case "2": case "3": // Put multiple cases on the same
                                  // line to save vertical space.
        console.log("small");
        break;

    case "10": case "11": case "12":
        console.log("large");
        break;

    default:
        console.log("strange");
        break;
}

This makes for much more compact code in some cases.

3
  • 3
    I think the syntax is the same as other JS environments. Commented Sep 1, 2015 at 11:02
  • 1
    @AfshinMehrabani It might be, I have only tested it in nodejs context.
    – Automatico
    Commented Sep 1, 2015 at 12:09
  • Yes. I like save vertical space!
    – Channel
    Commented Mar 26, 2020 at 16:42
8

Here is one more easy-to-use switch case statement. which can fulfill your requirement. We can use the find method in the switch statement to get the desire output.

    switch(varname){
    case["afshin","saeed","larry"].find(name => name === varname):
        alert("Hey")
        break;
    default:
        alert('Default case');
        break;
}
6

I use it like this:

switch (true){
     case /Pressure/.test(sensor): 
     {
        console.log('Its pressure!');
        break;
     }

     case /Temperature/.test(sensor): 
     {
        console.log('Its temperature!');
        break;
     }
}
4
  • You don't need to use the g flag, since you're only using the regexes once and throwing them away. In fact, if you were keeping them outside the function, the g flag would harm you by trying to match from a non-0 index on subsequent .test(s. I also fixed a typo where the switch case was on sensor variable and not true constant for matching boolean expressions. See the edit. Commented Feb 3, 2019 at 1:42
  • I used this format to test against file types. Ex: case /officedocument/.test(type) && /presentation/.test(type): iconClass = "far fa-file-powerpoint red"; break;
    – tbone849
    Commented Feb 20, 2020 at 1:32
  • This is probably the best method of checking the input. See next comment for suggested edit. Commented May 16, 2021 at 17:56
  • typescriptlang.org/play?#code/… Commented May 16, 2021 at 17:56
5

Some interesting methods. For me the best way to solve is using .find.

You can give an indication of what the multiple cases are by using a suitable name inside your find function.

switch (varName)
{
   case ["afshin", "saeed", "larry"].find(firstName => firstName === varName):
       alert('Hey');
       break;

   default:
       alert('Default case');
       break;
}

Other answers are more suitable for the given example but if you have multiple cases to me this is the best way.

1
  • I like this approach. It also play's nicely with ESlint and other code formatters Commented Nov 18, 2021 at 21:29
4

It depends. Switch evaluates once and only once. Upon a match, all subsequent case statements until 'break' fire no matter what the case says.

var onlyMen = true;
var onlyWomen = false;
var onlyAdults = false;
 
 (function(){
   switch (true){
     case onlyMen:
       console.log ('onlymen');
     case onlyWomen:
       console.log ('onlyWomen');
     case onlyAdults:
       console.log ('onlyAdults');
       break;
     default:
       console.log('default');
   }
})(); // returns onlymen onlywomen onlyadults
<script src="https://getfirebug.com/firebug-lite-debug.js"></script>

1
  • Historically, switch is a variation of the (in)famous goto statement. The idea is that you go to one of these labels, and then continue. That is, the labels represent entry points; if you want to exit, you have to do it yourself, with either the break statement or possibly a return statement if you’re inside a function.
    – Manngo
    Commented Sep 16, 2021 at 2:37
4

You can use the 'in' operator...
It relies on the object/hash invocation, so it's as fast as JavaScript can be.

// Assuming you have defined functions f(), g(a) and h(a,b)
// somewhere in your code,
// you can define them inside the object, but...
// the code becomes hard to read. I prefer it this way.

o = { f1:f, f2:g, f3:h };

// If you use "STATIC" code can do:
o['f3']( p1, p2 )

// If your code is someway "DYNAMIC", to prevent false invocations
// m brings the function/method to be invoked (f1, f2, f3)
// and you can rely on arguments[] to solve any parameter problems.
if ( m in o ) o[m]()
3
  • how does this relate to switch? can you clarify it? Commented Dec 6, 2017 at 14:52
  • why would you want to make your code "hard to read". The first thing I was told as a programmer was to write code with the mindset that the next person reading your code is an axe wielding serial killer and he hates not being able to understand code.
    – MattE
    Commented Apr 15, 2018 at 15:17
  • Hi Matt... I'm presenting it here as a proof of concept... anyway this form provides you more funcionality and flexibility... and you only use it if you want... or if you find a constrain in your usual form of doing things... consider ir as one more tool in your programmer toolbox...
    – ZEE
    Commented Apr 16, 2018 at 16:12
3

You can do this:

alert([
  "afshin", 
  "saeed", 
  "larry",
  "sasha",
  "boby",
  "jhon",
  "anna",
  // ...
].includes(varName)? 'Hey' : 'Default case')

or just a single line of code:

alert(["afshin", "saeed", "larry",...].includes(varName)? 'Hey' : 'Default case')

a little improvement from ErikE's answer

2

I can see there are lots of good answers here, but what happens if we need to check more than 10 cases? Here is my own approach:

 function isAccessible(varName){
     let accessDenied = ['Liam', 'Noah', 'William', 'James', 'Logan', 'Benjamin',
                        'Mason', 'Elijah', 'Oliver', 'Jacob', 'Daniel', 'Lucas'];
      switch (varName) {
         case (accessDenied.includes(varName) ? varName : null):
             return 'Access Denied!';
         default:
           return 'Access Allowed.';
       }
    }

    console.log(isAccessible('Liam'));
1
  • 5
    This is abuse of the switch statement. Just if (accessDenied.includes(varName)) return 'Access Denied!'; return 'Access Allowed.' is more than enough. Commented Feb 2, 2019 at 13:55
2

The problem with the above approaches, is that you have to repeat the several cases every time you call the function which has the switch. A more robust solution is to have a map or a dictionary.

Here is an example:

// The Map, divided by concepts
var dictionary = {
  timePeriod: {
    'month': [1, 'monthly', 'mensal', 'mês'],
    'twoMonths': [2, 'two months', '2 months', 'bimestral', 'bimestre'],
    'trimester': [3, 'trimesterly', 'quarterly', 'trimestral'],
    'semester': [4, 'semesterly', 'semestral', 'halfyearly'],
    'year': [5, 'yearly', 'annual', 'ano']
  },
  distance: {
    'km': [1, 'kms', 'kilometre', 'kilometers', 'kilometres'],
    'mile': [2, 'mi', 'miles'],
    'nordicMile': [3, 'Nordic mile', 'mil (10 km)', 'Scandinavian mile']
  },
  fuelAmount: {
    'ltr': [1, 'l', 'litre', 'Litre', 'liter', 'Liter'],
    'gal (imp)': [2, 'imp gallon', 'imperial gal', 'gal (UK)'],
    'gal (US)': [3, 'US gallon', 'US gal'],
    'kWh': [4, 'KWH']
  }
};

// This function maps every input to a certain defined value
function mapUnit (concept, value) {
  for (var key in dictionary[concept]) {
    if (key === value ||
      dictionary[concept][key].indexOf(value) !== -1) {
      return key
    }
  }
  throw Error('Uknown "'+value+'" for "'+concept+'"')
}

// You would use it simply like this
mapUnit("fuelAmount", "ltr") // => ltr
mapUnit("fuelAmount", "US gal") // => gal (US)
mapUnit("fuelAmount", 3) // => gal (US)
mapUnit("distance", "kilometre") // => km

// Now you can use the switch statement safely without the need
// to repeat the combinations every time you call the switch
var foo = 'monthly'
switch (mapUnit ('timePeriod', foo)) {
  case 'month':
    console.log('month')
    break
  case 'twoMonths':
    console.log('twoMonths')
    break
  case 'trimester':
    console.log('trimester')
    break
  case 'semester':
    console.log('semester')
    break
  case 'year':
    console.log('year')
    break
  default:
    throw Error('error')
}

1

One of the possible solutions is:

const names = {
afshin: 'afshin',
saeed: 'saeed',
larry: 'larry'
};

switch (varName) {
   case names[varName]: {
       alert('Hey');
       break;
   }

   default: {
       alert('Default case');
       break;
   }
}
2
  • Q pls which #ecma is this?
    – Bruno
    Commented Jul 30, 2019 at 13:08
  • Hi there. This is ES6
    – Jackkobec
    Commented Jul 30, 2019 at 19:15
0

Cleaner way to handle that

if (["triangle", "circle", "rectangle"].indexOf(base.type) > -1)
{
    //Do something
}else if (["areaMap", "irregular", "oval"].indexOf(base.type) > -1)
{
    //Do another thing
}

You can do that for multiple values with the same result

0

If your case conditions are complex, many case value matches, or dynamic value match required, then it may be best to move that case matching logic to handler child functions.

In your case, if say you had thousands of usernames to match against for a security permissions check for example, this method is cleaner option, more extensible, exposing the high level multi-way branch logic without getting swamped in a long list of case statements.


    switch (varName)
    {     
      case checkPatternAdministrator(varName):
        alert('Hey');
        break;

      case checkPatternUserTypeA(varName):
        alert('Hey2');
        break;

      case checkPatternUserTypeB(varName):
        alert('Hey3');
        break;

      default:
        alert('Default case');
        break;
    }
 function checkPatternAdministrator(varName) {
    // Logic to check Names against list, account permissions etc.
    // return the varName if a match is found, or blank string if not
    var matchedAdministratorName = varName;

    return matchedAdministratorName;
  }
-1

Another way of doing multiple cases in a switch statement, when inside a function:

function name(varName){
  switch (varName) {
     case 'afshin':
     case 'saeed':
     case 'larry':
       return 'Hey';
     default:
       return 'Default case';
   }
}

console.log(name('afshin')); // Hey

-2

Just change the switch condition approach:

switch (true) {
    case (function(){ return true; })():
        alert('true');
        break;
    case (function(){ return false; })():
        alert('false');
        break;
    default:
        alert('default');
}
4
  • 2
    If you put true as the switch expression, in the "case" statement(s) you can evaluate whatever you want provided you return a boolean Commented Feb 2, 2017 at 8:24
  • 1
    I think what he meant is that you can put an expression inside the function, who will evaluate and return a dynamic value for the case, thus allowing all sorts of complex conditions Commented Dec 6, 2017 at 14:57
  • For this @StefanoFavero note you dont actually need a function, just (expression) in parenthesis, and the return value must be the input. See my answer Commented Dec 6, 2017 at 15:01
  • why you minused it?? I advocate this solution because it provides a flexibility for complex conditions. Even if you dont like funcs as conditions, you may replace them with you multiple conditions such as switch(true) { case (var1 === 0 && var2 === true): {} } Commented Jun 16, 2019 at 8:11
-2

The switch statement is used to select one of many code blocks to execute based on a condition

  1. the value in the switch expression is compared to the different values provided
  2. if there is a match the code block related to it will be executed
  3. if there is no match the default block is executed

syntax:

switch(expression) {
  case x:
    // code block
    break;
  case y:
    // code block
    break;
  default:
    // code block
}

NOTE: It must be noted that if the break statement is omitted then the next block will be executed as well even if they does not match with switch expression. So don't forget to add the break statement at the end of each code block if you don't want to get the specified behaviour

A practical example: the following code returns the current day of the week in strings based on an integer (provided by 'new Date().getDay()')

switch (new Date().getDay()) {
  case 0:
    day = "Sunday";
    break;
  case 1:
    day = "Monday";
    break;
  case 2:
     day = "Tuesday";
    break;
  case 3:
    day = "Wednesday";
    break;
  case 4:
    day = "Thursday";
    break;
  case 5:
    day = "Friday";
    break;
  case 6:
    day = "Saturday";
}

the code samples were taken from W3Schools

1
  • this doesn't answer the specific question the user posted.
    – bioin4
    Commented Jun 2, 2023 at 1:17
-4
<head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
    <title>Example1</title>
    <link rel="stylesheet" href="css/style.css" >
    <script src="js/jquery-1.11.3.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
    <script>
        function display_case(){
            var num =   document.getElementById('number').value;

                switch(num){

                    case (num = "1"):
                    document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = "You select day Sunday";
                    break;

                    case (num = "2"):
                    document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = "You select day  Monday";
                    break;

                    case (num = "3"):
                    document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = "You select day  Tuesday";
                    break;

                    case (num = "4"):
                    document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = "You select day  Wednesday";
                    break;

                    case (num = "5"):
                    document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = "You select day  Thusday";
                    break;

                    case (num = "6"):
                    document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = "You select day  Friday";
                    break;

                    case (num = "7"):
                    document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = "You select day  Saturday";
                    break;

                    default:
                    document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = "You select day  Invalid Weekday";
                    break
                }

        }
    </script>
</head>
<body>
    <center>
        <div id="error"></div>
        <center>
            <h2> Switch Case Example </h2>
            <p>Enter a Number Between 1 to 7</p>
            <input type="text" id="number" />
            <button onclick="display_case();">Check</button><br />
            <div id="result"><b></b></div>
        </center>
    </center>
</body>
4
  • 4
    classic jquery inclusion :)
    – ptim
    Commented Jul 8, 2016 at 0:02
  • 4
    This is not how the switch statement is supposed to work. It’s just case "1":, not case (num = "1"):. Commented Feb 1, 2017 at 21:11
  • Why not put day value inside case and document.getElementById("result").innerHTML = ....outside the switch and add the day value result at the end? Commented Aug 22, 2018 at 9:00
  • @Xufox I love how he literally overwrites num but it still works because the switch has already been evaluated and the assignment yields the value. This is programming by mutation/machine learning at its finest. Commented Feb 2, 2019 at 14:15
-4

You could write it like this:

switch (varName)
{
   case "afshin": 
   case "saeed": 
   case "larry": 
       alert('Hey');
       break;

   default: 
       alert('Default case');
       break;
}         
1
  • 8
    This is the same answer as everyone else, i will fix the " that you forgot, but think about deleting this.
    – Gaunt
    Commented Mar 11, 2016 at 15:16
-6

For me this is the simplest way:

switch (["afshin","saeed","larry"].includes(varName) ? 1 : 2) {
   case 1:
       alert('Hey');
       break;

   default:
       alert('Default case');
       break;
}
3
  • How is this the “simplest” way? Just replace this with an if statement. Commented Mar 5, 2021 at 23:55
  • If yo uhave in the array 20 elements you'd need 20 if's. This way is good for many elements. Commented Mar 7, 2021 at 12:04
  • Not at all.. Look, you already have 3 elements in your array. All you'd need is populate that array with the extra values. What Sebastian is saying here is that your switch acts exactly like an if statement so you are totally wrong, plus you did not even consider the case "2", you just assumed default is your "else". Commented Mar 23, 2021 at 14:52

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.