I get an array of dictionaries back from reading json off a web server and use the following to make sure I got a particular key in the first dictionary in the array before getting its int value:
if([jsonObject[0] objectForKey:#"votes"]!= nil)
{
int votes = [[jsonObject[0] objectForKey:#"votes"] intValue];
[[UserObject userUnique] updateVotes:votes];
}
However, my app still occasionally crashes saying I have called intValue on Null. I have also tried structuring the control statement as
if([jsonObject[0] objectForKey:#"votes"])
but this also leads to the same error/app crashing. My syntax seems in line with accepted answers on SO (Check if key exists in NSDictionary is null or not). Any suggestions for what else/how else I should check the existence of key-value pair for applying intvalue?
Thank you for any advice.
There is a difference between nil and null. nil is not an object: it's a special pointer value. null (as retuned by [NSNull null]) is an object: it's needed because it can be stored in containers like NSDictionary.
NSString *votesString = [jsonObject[0] objectForKey:#"votes"];
if (votesString != nil && votesString != [NSNull null])
{
int votes = [votesString intValue];
[[UserObject userUnique] updateVotes:votes];
}
EDIT: An answer to #SunnysideProductions question
The post you mentioned recommends a way of turning null values into nil values by creating a -safeObjectForKey: method. You are not using -safeObjectForKey:, you are using the default -objectForKey: method.
Be consecutive in your code. Don't run with methods. It would be better add more null- and type-checks in particular in working with json. Let's do it:
if (jsonObject && [jsonObject isKindOfClass:[NSArray class]])
{
NSArray *jsonArray=(NSArray *)jsonObject;
if (jsonArray.count>0)
{
id firstObject=jsonArray[0];
if ([firstObject isKindOfClass:[NSDictionary class]])
{
NSDictionary *jsonDict=(NSDictionary *)firstObject;
id votesNumber=jsonDict[#"votes"];
if (votesNumber && [votesNumber isKindOfClass:[NSNumber class]])
{
int votes=[votesNumber intValue];
[[UserObject userUnique] updateVotes:votes];
}
}
}
}
Now the code is more safe. Does it still crash?
When you call objectForKeyin nullable dictionary, app gets crashed so I fixed this from following way.
- (instancetype)initWithDictionary:(NSDictionary*)dictionary {
id object = dictionary;
if (dictionary && (object != [NSNull null])) {
self.name = [dictionary objectForKey:#"name"];
self.age = [dictionary objectForKey:#"age"];
}
return self;
}
I have this code:
NSIndexSet *indexes = [anOrderedSet indexesOfObjectsPassingTest:^BOOL(id obj, NSUInteger idx, BOOL *stop) {
if([self testObj: obj]) return YES;
else return NO;
}];
if(indexes == NSNotFound) NSLog(#"No objects were found passing the test");
And this causes a warning from Xcode stating "Comparison between pointer and integer ('NSIndexSet *' and 'int')". And I totally agree with Xcode on this one.
However, the return value of the function is of type NSIndexSet* and the Apple documentation (http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/Foundation/Reference/NSOrderedSet_Class/Reference/Reference.html) states:
Return Value
The index of the corresponding value in the ordered set that passes the test specified by predicate. If no objects in the ordered set pass the test, returns NSNotFound.."
So what's the deal with returning NSNotFound (which is an NSInteger) when the return type of the function is a pointer to NSIndexSet? Is it safe to suppress the warning by changing the comparison to:
if(indexes == (NSIndexSet*) NSNotFound) NSLog(#"No objects were found passing the test");
Because, theoretically, indexes could be a valid returned NSIndexSet pointer that just happens to point to a memory address equal to NSNotFound, correct?
I’m afraid the documentation is wrong.
You should check against an empty NSIndexSet:
if ([indexes count] == 0) NSLog(#"No object were found passing the test");
You should probably open a bug report with Apple.
Apparently the Apple documentation is incorrect.
In my tests, I am finding that if no objects in the ordered set pass the test, then the returned object is an NSIndexSet of count equal to zero.
Thus, the correct test is:
if(indexes.count == 0) NSLog(#"No objects were found passing the test");
I'm not exactly sure how to check whether a NSString is blank or not, I've got this code...
NSString *imageName = [myItem objectForKey:#"iconName"];
if(imageName == #"")
{
}
And when I do a print on the myItem object, it comes up as..
iconName = "";
At the NSString *imageName line, I noticed in xcode in the console it says
"variable is not NSString"
Which I don't get as iconName is saved and stored on the parse.com database as a NSString.
When I run that code though it doesn't seem to realise that imageName = "";
You should use this code block when comparing strings:
if ([imageName isEqualToString:#""]){
}
You need to use isEqualToString to compare two strings. If you just use == then you are comparing two pointers.
You could also check to see if the object you are receiving is a NSString by:
if ([imageName isKindOfClass:[NSString class]])
Hope this helps.
Although you have a few answers already, here is my take.
First of all, your warning (not error) can be fixed like this:
NSString *imageName = (NSString *)[myItem objectForKey:#"iconName"];
Then, I would check to make sure that the string is not nil and that it is not blank. The easiest way to do this in objective-C is to check the length of the string, since if it nil it will return 0, and if it is empty, it will return 0:
if([imageName length] == 0)
{
// This is an empty string.
}
As #jlehr points out, if there is the possibility that imageName may not actually be stored as a string, then in order to prevent a crash you need to check first. (This may or may not be needed, depending on the logic of your application):
if ([imageName isKindOfClass:[NSString class]]
{
if([imageName length] == 0)
{
// This is an empty string.
}
}
The "variable is not NSString" is probably because objectForKey: return an id.
To should use [imageName isEqualToString:#""].
I need to check if an dict has a key or not. How?
objectForKey will return nil if a key doesn't exist.
if ([[dictionary allKeys] containsObject:key]) {
// contains key
}
or
if ([dictionary objectForKey:key]) {
// contains object
}
More recent versions of Objective-C and Clang have a modern syntax for this:
if (myDictionary[myKey]) {
}
You do not have to check for equality with nil, because only non-nil Objective-C objects can be stored in dictionaries(or arrays). And all Objective-C objects are truthy values. Even #NO, #0, and [NSNull null] evaluate as true.
Edit: Swift is now a thing.
For Swift you would try something like the following
if let value = myDictionary[myKey] {
}
This syntax will only execute the if block if myKey is in the dict and if it is then the value is stored in the value variable. Note that this works for even falsey values like 0.
if ([mydict objectForKey:#"mykey"]) {
// key exists.
}
else
{
// ...
}
When using JSON dictionaries:
#define isNull(value) value == nil || [value isKindOfClass:[NSNull class]]
if( isNull( dict[#"my_key"] ) )
{
// do stuff
}
I like Fernandes' answer even though you ask for the obj twice.
This should also do (more or less the same as Martin's A).
id obj;
if ((obj=[dict objectForKey:#"blah"])) {
// use obj
} else {
// Do something else like creating the obj and add the kv pair to the dict
}
Martin's and this answer both work on iPad2 iOS 5.0.1 9A405
One very nasty gotcha which just wasted a bit of my time debugging - you may find yourself prompted by auto-complete to try using doesContain which seems to work.
Except, doesContain uses an id comparison instead of the hash comparison used by objectForKey so if you have a dictionary with string keys it will return NO to a doesContain.
NSMutableDictionary* keysByName = [[NSMutableDictionary alloc] init];
keysByName[#"fred"] = #1;
NSString* test = #"fred";
if ([keysByName objectForKey:test] != nil)
NSLog(#"\nit works for key lookups"); // OK
else
NSLog(#"\nsod it");
if (keysByName[test] != nil)
NSLog(#"\nit works for key lookups using indexed syntax"); // OK
else
NSLog(#"\nsod it");
if ([keysByName doesContain:#"fred"])
NSLog(#"\n doesContain works literally");
else
NSLog(#"\nsod it"); // this one fails because of id comparison used by doesContain
Using Swift, it would be:
if myDic[KEY] != nil {
// key exists
}
Yes. This kind of errors are very common and lead to app crash. So I use to add NSDictionary in each project as below:
//.h file code :
#interface NSDictionary (AppDictionary)
- (id)objectForKeyNotNull : (id)key;
#end
//.m file code is as below
#import "NSDictionary+WKDictionary.h"
#implementation NSDictionary (WKDictionary)
- (id)objectForKeyNotNull:(id)key {
id object = [self objectForKey:key];
if (object == [NSNull null])
return nil;
return object;
}
#end
In code you can use as below:
NSStrting *testString = [dict objectForKeyNotNull:#"blah"];
For checking existence of key in NSDictionary:
if([dictionary objectForKey:#"Replace your key here"] != nil)
NSLog(#"Key Exists");
else
NSLog(#"Key not Exists");
Because nil cannot be stored in Foundation data structures NSNull is sometimes to represent a nil. Because NSNull is a singleton object you can check to see if NSNull is the value stored in dictionary by using direct pointer comparison:
if ((NSNull *)[user objectForKey:#"myKey"] == [NSNull null]) { }
Solution for swift 4.2
So, if you just want to answer the question whether the dictionary contains the key, ask:
let keyExists = dict[key] != nil
If you want the value and you know the dictionary contains the key, say:
let val = dict[key]!
But if, as usually happens, you don't know it contains the key - you want to fetch it and use it, but only if it exists - then use something like if let:
if let val = dict[key] {
// now val is not nil and the Optional has been unwrapped, so use it
}
I'd suggest you store the result of the lookup in a temp variable, test if the temp variable is nil and then use it. That way you don't look the same object up twice:
id obj = [dict objectForKey:#"blah"];
if (obj) {
// use obj
} else {
// Do something else
}
if ([MyDictionary objectForKey:MyKey]) {
// "Key Exist"
}
As Adirael suggested objectForKey to check key existance but When you call objectForKeyin nullable dictionary, app gets crashed so I fixed this from following way.
- (instancetype)initWithDictionary:(NSDictionary*)dictionary {
id object = dictionary;
if (dictionary && (object != [NSNull null])) {
self.name = [dictionary objectForKey:#"name"];
self.age = [dictionary objectForKey:#"age"];
}
return self;
}
if ( [dictionary[#"data"][#"action"] isKindOfClass:NSNull.class ] ){
//do something if doesn't exist
}
This is for nested dictionary structure
I'm doing some Objective-C programming that involves parsing an NSXmlDocument and populating an objects properties from the result.
First version looked like this:
if([elementName compare:#"companyName"] == 0)
[character setCorporationName:currentElementText];
else if([elementName compare:#"corporationID"] == 0)
[character setCorporationID:currentElementText];
else if([elementName compare:#"name"] == 0)
...
But I don't like the if-else-if-else pattern this produces. Looking at the switch statement I see that i can only handle ints, chars etc and not objects... so is there a better implementation pattern I'm not aware of?
BTW I did actually come up with a better solution for setting the object's properties, but I want to know specifically about the if-else vs switch pattern in Objective-C
You should take advantage of Key-Value Coding:
[character setValue:currentElementText forKey:elementName];
If the data is untrusted, you might want to check that the key is valid:
if (![validKeysCollection containsObject:elementName])
// Exception or error
I hope you'll all forgive me for going out on a limb here, but I would like to address the more general question of parsing XML documents in Cocoa without the need of if-else statements. The question as originally stated assigns the current element text to an instance variable of the character object. As jmah pointed out, this can be solved using key-value coding. However, in a more complex XML document this might not be possible. Consider for example the following.
<xmlroot>
<corporationID>
<stockSymbol>EXAM</stockSymbol>
<uuid>31337</uuid>
</corporationID>
<companyName>Example Inc.</companyName>
</xmlroot>
There are multiple approaches to dealing with this. Off of the top of my head, I can think of two using NSXMLDocument. The first uses NSXMLElement. It is fairly straightforward and does not involve the if-else issue at all. You simply get the root element and go through its named elements one by one.
NSXMLElement* root = [xmlDocument rootElement];
// Assuming that we only have one of each element.
[character setCorperationName:[[[root elementsForName:#"companyName"] objectAtIndex:0] stringValue]];
NSXMLElement* corperationId = [root elementsForName:#"corporationID"];
[character setCorperationStockSymbol:[[[corperationId elementsForName:#"stockSymbol"] objectAtIndex:0] stringValue]];
[character setCorperationUUID:[[[corperationId elementsForName:#"uuid"] objectAtIndex:0] stringValue]];
The next one uses the more general NSXMLNode, walks through the tree, and directly uses the if-else structure.
// The first line is the same as the last example, because NSXMLElement inherits from NSXMLNode
NSXMLNode* aNode = [xmlDocument rootElement];
while(aNode = [aNode nextNode]){
if([[aNode name] isEqualToString:#"companyName"]){
[character setCorperationName:[aNode stringValue]];
}else if([[aNode name] isEqualToString:#"corporationID"]){
NSXMLNode* correctParent = aNode;
while((aNode = [aNode nextNode]) == nil && [aNode parent != correctParent){
if([[aNode name] isEqualToString:#"stockSymbol"]){
[character setCorperationStockSymbol:[aNode stringValue]];
}else if([[aNode name] isEqualToString:#"uuid"]){
[character setCorperationUUID:[aNode stringValue]];
}
}
}
}
This is a good candidate for eliminating the if-else structure, but like the original problem, we can't simply use switch-case here. However, we can still eliminate if-else by using performSelector. The first step is to define the a method for each element.
- (NSNode*)parse_companyName:(NSNode*)aNode
{
[character setCorperationName:[aNode stringValue]];
return aNode;
}
- (NSNode*)parse_corporationID:(NSNode*)aNode
{
NSXMLNode* correctParent = aNode;
while((aNode = [aNode nextNode]) == nil && [aNode parent != correctParent){
[self invokeMethodForNode:aNode prefix:#"parse_corporationID_"];
}
return [aNode previousNode];
}
- (NSNode*)parse_corporationID_stockSymbol:(NSNode*)aNode
{
[character setCorperationStockSymbol:[aNode stringValue]];
return aNode;
}
- (NSNode*)parse_corporationID_uuid:(NSNode*)aNode
{
[character setCorperationUUID:[aNode stringValue]];
return aNode;
}
The magic happens in the invokeMethodForNode:prefix: method. We generate the selector based on the name of the element, and perform that selector with aNode as the only parameter. Presto bango, we've eliminated the need for an if-else statement. Here's the code for that method.
- (NSNode*)invokeMethodForNode:(NSNode*)aNode prefix:(NSString*)aPrefix
{
NSNode* ret = nil;
NSString* methodName = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%#%#:", prefix, [aNode name]];
SEL selector = NSSelectorFromString(methodName);
if([self respondsToSelector:selector])
ret = [self performSelector:selector withObject:aNode];
return ret;
}
Now, instead of our larger if-else statement (the one that differentiated between companyName and corporationID), we can simply write one line of code
NSXMLNode* aNode = [xmlDocument rootElement];
while(aNode = [aNode nextNode]){
aNode = [self invokeMethodForNode:aNode prefix:#"parse_"];
}
Now I apologize if I got any of this wrong, it's been a while since I've written anything with NSXMLDocument, it's late at night and I didn't actually test this code. So if you see anything wrong, please leave a comment or edit this answer.
However, I believe I have just shown how properly-named selectors can be used in Cocoa to completely eliminate if-else statements in cases like this. There are a few gotchas and corner cases. The performSelector: family of methods only takes 0, 1, or 2 argument methods whose arguments and return types are objects, so if the types of the arguments and return type are not objects, or if there are more than two arguments, then you would have to use an NSInvocation to invoke it. You have to make sure that the method names you generate aren't going to call other methods, especially if the target of the call is another object, and this particular method naming scheme won't work on elements with non-alphanumeric characters. You could get around that by escaping the XML element names in your method names somehow, or by building an NSDictionary using the method names as the keys and the selectors as the values. This can get pretty memory intensive and end up taking a longer time. performSelector dispatch like I described is pretty fast. For very large if-else statements, this method may even be faster than an if-else statement.
If you want to use as little code as possible, and your element names and setters are all named so that if elementName is #"foo" then setter is setFoo:, you could do something like:
SEL selector = NSSelectorFromString([NSString stringWithFormat:#"set%#:", [elementName capitalizedString]]);
[character performSelector:selector withObject:currentElementText];
or possibly even:
[character setValue:currentElementText forKey:elementName]; // KVC-style
Though these will of course be a bit slower than using a bunch of if statements.
[Edit: The second option was already mentioned by someone; oops!]
Dare I suggest using a macro?
#define TEST( _name, _method ) \
if ([elementName isEqualToString:# _name] ) \
[character _method:currentElementText]; else
#define ENDTEST { /* empty */ }
TEST( "companyName", setCorporationName )
TEST( "setCorporationID", setCorporationID )
TEST( "name", setName )
:
:
ENDTEST
One way I've done this with NSStrings is by using an NSDictionary and enums. It may not be the most elegant, but I think it makes the code a little more readable. The following pseudocode is extracted from one of my projects:
typedef enum { UNKNOWNRESIDUE, DEOXYADENINE, DEOXYCYTOSINE, DEOXYGUANINE, DEOXYTHYMINE } SLSResidueType;
static NSDictionary *pdbResidueLookupTable;
...
if (pdbResidueLookupTable == nil)
{
pdbResidueLookupTable = [[NSDictionary alloc] initWithObjectsAndKeys:
[NSNumber numberWithInteger:DEOXYADENINE], #"DA",
[NSNumber numberWithInteger:DEOXYCYTOSINE], #"DC",
[NSNumber numberWithInteger:DEOXYGUANINE], #"DG",
[NSNumber numberWithInteger:DEOXYTHYMINE], #"DT",
nil];
}
SLSResidueType residueIdentifier = [[pdbResidueLookupTable objectForKey:residueType] intValue];
switch (residueIdentifier)
{
case DEOXYADENINE: do something; break;
case DEOXYCYTOSINE: do something; break;
case DEOXYGUANINE: do something; break;
case DEOXYTHYMINE: do something; break;
}
The if-else implementation you have is the right way to do this, since switch won't work with objects. Apart from maybe being a bit harder to read (which is subjective), there is no real downside in using if-else statements this way.
Although there's not necessarily a better way to do something like that for one time use, why use "compare" when you can use "isEqualToString"? That would seem to be more performant since the comparison would halt at the first non-matching character, rather than going through the whole thing to calculate a valid comparison result (though come to think of it the comparison might be clear at the same point) - also though it would look a little cleaner because that call returns a BOOL.
if([elementName isEqualToString:#"companyName"] )
[character setCorporationName:currentElementText];
else if([elementName isEqualToString:#"corporationID"] )
[character setCorporationID:currentElementText];
else if([elementName isEqualToString:#"name"] )
There is actually a fairly simple way to deal with cascading if-else statements in a language like Objective-C. Yes, you can use subclassing and overriding, creating a group of subclasses that implement the same method differently, invoking the correct implementation at runtime using a common message. This works well if you wish to choose one of a few implementations, but it can result in a needless proliferation of subclasses if you have many small, slightly different implementations like you tend to have in long if-else or switch statements.
Instead, factor out the body of each if/else-if clause into its own method, all in the same class. Name the messages that invoke them in a similar fashion. Now create an NSArray containing the selectors of those messages (obtained using #selector()). Coerce the string you were testing in the conditionals into a selector using NSSelectorFromString() (you may need to concatenate additional words or colons to it first depending on how you named those messages, and whether or not they take arguments). Now have self perform the selector using performSelector:.
This approach has the downside that it can clutter-up the class with many new messages, but it's probably better to clutter-up a single class than the entire class hierarchy with new subclasses.
Posting this as a response to Wevah's answer above -- I would've edited, but I don't have high enough reputation yet:
unfortunately the first method breaks for fields with more than one word in them -- like xPosition. capitalizedString will convert that to Xposition, which when combined with the format give you setXposition: . Definitely not what was wanted here. Here is what I'm using in my code:
NSString *capName = [elementName stringByReplacingCharactersInRange:NSMakeRange(0, 1) withString:[[elementName substringToIndex:1] uppercaseString]];
SEL selector = NSSelectorFromString([NSString stringWithFormat:#"set%#:", capName]);
Not as pretty as the first method, but it works.
I have come up with a solution that uses blocks to create a switch-like structure for objects. There it goes:
BOOL switch_object(id aObject, ...)
{
va_list args;
va_start(args, aObject);
id value = nil;
BOOL matchFound = NO;
while ( (value = va_arg(args,id)) )
{
void (^block)(void) = va_arg(args,id);
if ( [aObject isEqual:value] )
{
block();
matchFound = YES;
break;
}
}
va_end(args);
return matchFound;
}
As you can see, this is an oldschool C function with variable argument list. I pass the object to be tested in the first argument, followed by the case_value-case_block pairs. (Recall that Objective-C blocks are just objects.) The while loop keeps extracting these pairs until the object value is matched or there are no cases left (see notes below).
Usage:
NSString* str = #"stuff";
switch_object(str,
#"blah", ^{
NSLog(#"blah");
},
#"foobar", ^{
NSLog(#"foobar");
},
#"stuff", ^{
NSLog(#"stuff");
},
#"poing", ^{
NSLog(#"poing");
},
nil); // <-- sentinel
// will print "stuff"
Notes:
this is a first approximation without any error checking
the fact that the case handlers are blocks, requires additional care when it comes to visibility, scope and memory management of variables referenced from within
if you forget the sentinel, you are doomed :P
you can use the boolean return value to trigger a "default" case when none of the cases have been matched
The most common refactoring suggested for eliminating if-else or switch statements is introducing polymorphism (see http://www.refactoring.com/catalog/replaceConditionalWithPolymorphism.html). Eliminating such conditionals is most important when they are duplicated. In the case of XML parsing like your sample you are essentially moving the data to a more natural structure so that you won't have to duplicate the conditional elsewhere. In this case the if-else or switch statement is probably good enough.
In this case, I'm not sure if you can easily refactor the class to introduce polymorphism as Bradley suggests, since it's a Cocoa-native class. Instead, the Objective-C way to do it is to use a class category to add an elementNameCode method to NSSting:
typedef enum {
companyName = 0,
companyID,
...,
Unknown
} ElementCode;
#interface NSString (ElementNameCodeAdditions)
- (ElementCode)elementNameCode;
#end
#implementation NSString (ElementNameCodeAdditions)
- (ElementCode)elementNameCode {
if([self compare:#"companyName"]==0) {
return companyName;
} else if([self compare:#"companyID"]==0) {
return companyID;
} ... {
}
return Unknown;
}
#end
In your code, you could now use a switch on [elementName elementNameCode] (and gain the associated compiler warnings if you forget to test for one of the enum members etc.).
As Bradley points out, this may not be worth it if the logic is only used in one place.
What we've done in our projects where we need to so this sort of thing over and over, is to set up a static CFDictionary mapping the strings/objects to check against to a simple integer value. It leads to code that looks like this:
static CFDictionaryRef map = NULL;
int count = 3;
const void *keys[count] = { #"key1", #"key2", #"key3" };
const void *values[count] = { (uintptr_t)1, (uintptr_t)2, (uintptr_t)3 };
if (map == NULL)
map = CFDictionaryCreate(NULL,keys,values,count,&kCFTypeDictionaryKeyCallBacks,NULL);
switch((uintptr_t)CFDictionaryGetValue(map,[node name]))
{
case 1:
// do something
break;
case 2:
// do something else
break;
case 3:
// this other thing too
break;
}
If you're targeting Leopard only, you could use an NSMapTable instead of a CFDictionary.
Similar to Lvsti I am using blocks to perform a switching pattern on objects.
I wrote a very simple filter block based chain, that takes n filter blocks and performs each filter on the object.
Each filter can alter the object, but must return it. No matter what.
NSObject+Functional.h
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
typedef id(^FilterBlock)(id element, NSUInteger idx, BOOL *stop);
#interface NSObject (Functional)
-(id)processByPerformingFilterBlocks:(NSArray *)filterBlocks;
#end
NSObject+Functional.m
#implementation NSObject (Functional)
-(id)processByPerformingFilterBlocks:(NSArray *)filterBlocks
{
__block id blockSelf = self;
[filterBlocks enumerateObjectsUsingBlock:^( id (^block)(id,NSUInteger idx, BOOL*) , NSUInteger idx, BOOL *stop) {
blockSelf = block(blockSelf, idx, stop);
}];
return blockSelf;
}
#end
Now we can set up n FilterBlocks to test for the different cases.
FilterBlock caseYES = ^id(id element, NSUInteger idx, BOOL *breakAfter){
if ([element isEqualToString:#"YES"]) {
NSLog(#"You did it");
*breakAfter = YES;
}
return element;
};
FilterBlock caseNO = ^id(id element, NSUInteger idx, BOOL *breakAfter){
if ([element isEqualToString:#"NO"] ) {
NSLog(#"Nope");
*breakAfter = YES;
}
return element;
};
Now we stick those block we want to test as a filter chain in an array:
NSArray *filters = #[caseYES, caseNO];
and can perform it on an object
id obj1 = #"YES";
id obj2 = #"NO";
[obj1 processByPerformingFilterBlocks:filters];
[obj2 processByPerformingFilterBlocks:filters];
This approach can be used for switching but also for any (conditional) filter chain application, as the blocks can edit the element and pass it on.