a If the following switch statement were implemented using a

(a) If the following switch statement were implemented using a jump table, how many elements

would the table contain? Would it make sense to use a jump table to implement this switch

statement? Why or why not? If not then what type of implementation will be more suitable?

Why?

switch (i) {

case 40: j = a; break;

case 41: j = b; break;

case 42: j = c; break;

case 43: j = d; break;

case 44: j = e; break;

case 45: j = r; break;

case 46: j = g; break;

}

(b) Answer the same questions as in part (a), using the following switch statement instead:

switch (i) {

case 20: j = a; break;

case 67: j = b; break;

case 97: j = c; break;

case 400: j = d; break;

case 310: j = e; break;

case 10: j = f; break;

}

Solution

Answer:

In part a. 7 elements would contain in a table. And it makes sense to make jump table for switch statement because it tells how many times a code can jump to the other area of code.

In part b , 6 elments would contain in a table. It makes sense to make jump table for switch statement because i tells us how many times a code can jump to the other area fo code.